From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20206 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2006 15:05:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 20186 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Apr 2006 15:05:03 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:05:00 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 352E548CEB4 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2006 11:04:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09994-01-3 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2006 11:04:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (s142-179-108-108.bc.hsia.telus.net [142.179.108.108]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E00EC48CE43 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2006 11:04:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 2E68E47E7F; Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:04:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:35:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Time for a new release? Message-ID: <20060406150457.GA800@adacore.com> References: <20060315043747.GA695@adacore.com> <20060315170117.GA3806@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20060317194104.GD19068@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060317194104.GD19068@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00065.txt.bz2 [moving the discussion to gdb (from gdb-patches) as recommended] > > > Branch: Apr 3rd > > > Pre-release: Apr 5th > > > Release: Apr 19th > > Sounds reasonable to me. I know I have a lot of things coming up > that I don't want to sneak "under the wire" into a release - I'll > want to give them a lot of time to settle down. I have set some time aside to work on this today. Is Apr 3rd still OK for cutting the branch? > > >Basically, a first pre-release a couple of days after branching. > > >And then the first release if all goes well two weeks after, to > > >give us some time to flush any issue we might find. > > This is a pretty aggressive schedule; if we want the release to receive > broad testing, I recommend waiting a bit longer. Would one month be a good duration? I think this is what we did the last time. > > >Also, do we want to distribute GDB with -Werror enabled? It's fair > > >to have us build GDB with -Werror, but I would feel more comfortable > > >distributing something that's easier to compiler for the end user. > > >I think this will avoid some traffic from users who don't know what > > >to do with the fatal warnings. > > I agree. Maybe some day it will be appropriate to ship GDB with > -Werror, but I'd rather not do it immediately. OK. Will post a patch to disable -Werror by default. -- Joel