Will tree-ssa be GCC 3.5?

[Robert Dewar]

Steven Bosscher wrote:

> If GCC wants to have some of that money, then it (as a project) will have to 
> act like a credible contender, with a sane development timeline and plan, and 
> without the attitude you're displaying here.

GCC is not a project, it is a piece of software, and as such cannot 
properly be said to want some money :-)

The general FSF volunteer community is not the party to act here as a 
credible contender. It is not set up to make proposals for money and 
guarantee performance. That has to be the domain of companies or 
consultants with appropriate expertise.

> I've had it with all this "well we can't tell because we're all volunteers" 
> crap.  tree-ssa is being developed almost entirely by people who are being 
> paid for it.  At least three major companies have three or more people 
> working on it.  This is not a volunteers project.

Fine, so it is in the context of these "major companies" that it makes 
sense to follow up the issue of getting a specific commitment.

> Considering that the basic infrastructure as it is now is not even a year old 
> and it's really starting to get in shape now.  When 3.4 finally goes out, 
> even more people can help out.  tree-ssa _can_ be ready for 3.5.
> 
> Can we for once please commit ourselves to something and just say that 
> tree-ssa will be part of 3.5?

Who is we here? How could such a commitment be made? A commitment 
requires a contract between parties, who is the party here. The best 
that you can expect is an expression of intent.

Of course one of the companies involved could, for free, give a 
commitment, but in the absence of a contract that would still only be an 
expression of intent, and not something that could be counted on.

I am sorry that you read my comment as insulting, it was certainly not 
intended to be. I was simply pointing out that there is a huge gulf 
between wanting something done from the general community, and getting a 
contractual guarantee, suitable for incorporation into a mission 
critical project plan, that something will be done on a specific schedule.

Robert Dewar