From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13451 invoked by alias); 10 Jul 2007 19:33:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 13419 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Jul 2007 19:33:27 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:33:25 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CCC982A4; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:33:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A719829E; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:33:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1I8LSb-0006zE-8C; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:33:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Andrew Cagney , Nick Roberts , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB version numbering Message-ID: <20070710193321.GA26842@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , Andrew Cagney , Nick Roberts , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <18066.2956.730647.124877@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20070709172235.GA3876@adacore.com> <18066.47945.530232.677872@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <4693BACE.3030000@redhat.com> <20070710192534.GA3943@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070710192534.GA3943@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15 (2007-04-09) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00079.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 12:25:34PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > The reason to bump the major version doesn't need to be technical and > > previously hasn't. For instance, 5.x signified the freeing of GDB's CVS > > repo. Here, similarly, we've got the GPLv3 change that while > > non-technical is a very major change for GDB; something worth > > considering as a trigger for a major version number bump: > > > > GDB 7 is GPLv3+ > > GDB 6 is GPLv2+ > > Indeed. What do others think? I think that moving the source code repository into the open marked a fundamental change in the timeline of GDB, and changing to the GPLv3 will make at best a small bump. GPLv3 is a big deal spread out over the whole GNU project, but not a big deal for GDB in particular. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery