Re: Product branches in the GDB repository?

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 07:20:34PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> We're already pretty flexible about creating branches for development.  Does
> anyone have an object to branches for non-FSF releases?  I think it's a
> logical extension of current practice.
> 
> CodeSourcery does regular releases of an ARM toolchain, and we're going to
> have a bunch of as yet unsubmitted GDB patches in our next release.  Nothing
> deliberately unsubmitted, of course, but things which need additional
> polishing or review or input before they're ready for HEAD.  I would prefer
> to maintain them in the main repository, simply because it's easier with CVS.
> And that way the patches are easily available for any curious GDB
> developers.
> 
> FWIW, we already do this for both gcc and binutils.

No one objected, and Stan supported the idea, so I am currently tagging
csl-arm-20050325-branch.  This is a release branch for our 2005-Q1 ARM
toolchains; I intend for everything on the branch to be submitted to
mainline eventually, but some bits will take time to review, and others
may need interface changes before they are acceptable.  There will be
some native Windows patches and some remote protocol improvements in
addition to ARM-only changes.

Anyone have preferences on where to document branches?  We don't
currently do that in GDB.  Easiest would be a file gdb/BRANCHES,
parallel to binutils/BRANCHES, or on the "current CVS" page of the
web site.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC