From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2186 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2002 23:17:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2073 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2002 23:17:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO monkey.daikokuya.demon.co.uk) (158.152.184.26) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2002 23:17:31 -0000 Received: from neil by monkey.daikokuya.demon.co.uk with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 16q0C2-0000Ku-00; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 23:17:30 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:17:00 -0000 To: Richard Henderson , Zack Weinberg , Jim Blandy , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gcc development schedule [Re: sharing libcpp between GDB and GCC] Message-ID: <20020326231730.GA1283@daikokuya.demon.co.uk> References: <20020325234047.127345EA11@zwingli.cygnus.com> <20020326040735.GM23331@codesourcery.com> <20020326142901.B16366@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020326142901.B16366@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i From: Neil Booth X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00257.txt.bz2 Richard Henderson wrote:- > I think this is a mistake. It is completely unreasonable to have > the entire "major structural changes" time period concurrent with > "please work on making a release happen". I agree. I think the releases should be an 8-month cycle rather than a 6-month cycle. In other words, 4 months for destabilizing changes. Neil.