From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 103754 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2016 10:04:46 -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 103741 invoked by uid 89); 10 Feb 2016 10:04:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=our X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:04:45 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 384DC3D7AEB; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u1AA4g6b003172; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 05:04:43 -0500 Message-ID: <56BB0B3A.5080402@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:04:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, sergiodj@redhat.com, keiths@redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: branching for GDB 7.11 soon? (possibly Wed) References: <20160201030638.GG4008@adacore.com> <20160207081230.GA20874@adacore.com> <20160209115617.GG15342@adacore.com> <20160210034003.GJ15342@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20160210034003.GJ15342@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-02/txt/msg00273.txt.bz2 On 02/10/2016 03:40 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> 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. Hurray! Thanks everyone. Thanks, Pedro Alves