From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 68525 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2016 03:40:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 68487 invoked by uid 89); 10 Feb 2016 03:40:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=our X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 03:40:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4E2D116530; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:40:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id VSm3zhW+Xt4a; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:40:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C2E116531; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 22:40:07 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 080F7406C6; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:40:03 +0400 (RET) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 03:40:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, sergiodj@redhat.com, Yao Qi , Pedro Alves , keiths@redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: branching for GDB 7.11 soon? (possibly Wed) Message-ID: <20160210034003.GJ15342@adacore.com> References: <20160201030638.GG4008@adacore.com> <20160207081230.GA20874@adacore.com> <20160209115617.GG15342@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160209115617.GG15342@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 > So, to summarize, given how easy it can be to break C++ building, > and looking at the issues we want to solve, I can propose the following > plan: > > 1. Branch now, hold the pre-release; > 2. Fix the issues above still pending on both master + branch; > 3. Once the issues above are fixed on the branch, issue > the first pre-release. Thanks everyone for making all the fixes; I just created the branch, and since everything in our list seems to have been fixed, I am going to start working on the first official pre-release right away. Stay tuned! -- Joel