From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65713 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2016 21:50:05 -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 65699 invoked by uid 89); 25 Apr 2016 21:50:04 -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=heads, massage, month, webpage 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; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:49:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9388116A92 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:49:52 -0400 (EDT) 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 X-DDIpOVKu8Z for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:49:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D65116A84 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:49:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2DCCD40780; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 14:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:50:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: gdb-7.11.1 re-spin update Message-ID: <20160425214951.GA4079@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00546.txt.bz2 Hello, It's been 2 months since 7.11 was released. If all goes well, we're therefore about 1 month away from the 7.11.1 release. So I thought I'd send a quick heads up as well as try to get a status update. Looking at the wiki page for that release branch (https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/GDB_7.11_Release), I see there are currently 2 items marked critical before 7.11.1 can be released: PR gdb/19828 (7.11 regression: non-stop gdb -p : internal error) PR remote/19863 (7.10 regression: gdb remote.c due to "setfs" with gdbserver <=7.9) We are missing an assignee (someone willing to take charge of getting a fix in) for both issues. Is anyone working on either of these? If you are, can you please add your name ahead of the relevant entries? Also, quick procedural question: I notice that the "Done" list has some items explicitly listed, and then a generic item giving a link to bugzilla for all bugs identified for 7.11.1, or else fixed for 7.11.1. I could conceive of using this kind of generic link for bugs identified as critical for 7.11, provided that we make sure that these bugs are always assigned to someone. Otherwise, we cannot know who to contact for an update when we get closer to the release. That being said, I have some reservations about this, because it is harder to make sure that whoever sets the target milestones does so after having consulted the group about it. Personally, I would prefer that we explicitly list each item in the wiki's TODO, because anyone can subscribe to updates here, and make sure that these updates were agreed upon before being added. For the "Done" section, on the other hand, using the generic link is a bit of a regression for me. Now, instead of copy/pasting one list (into the news webpage, and then the announcement email), I now have to copy/paste one list, then go to bugzilla and then massage another list into looking like the first one, so I can append that list too. I understand that this is easier for everyone but me; I am wondering if we could share a bit the work. It's a minute here and there for each one of us, so that I don't have to spend that minute times the number of fixes when I work on the release announcement. If you guys agree, I think what we can do is move the URL to the open bugs in bugzilla to an FYI section so we remember to review that list before actually starting the release process. But we'd then avoid those for the TODO and Done sections, explicitly listing each item in the wiki page instead. Would that be OK? Thanks, -- Joel