From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9031 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2009 02:47:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 9020 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Aug 2009 02:47:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:47:20 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BE2C2BABF5; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:41:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id gI0lwko3OqUb; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:41:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF8CA2BABF4; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 80F2DF5893; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:35:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Doug Evans Cc: Michael Snyder , Anirban Sinha , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: when is gdb 6.9 being released? Message-ID: <20090826024108.GB6540@adacore.com> References: <4A8C7EA8.4010808@vmware.com> <20090820022048.GD5319@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 2009-08/txt/msg00241.txt.bz2 > Can I suggest that a day be picked and announced at least two weeks in > advance, so that folks with things they want in have some amount of > time to finish the work. My 2 cents on this (others may disagree): I think we've delayed the release enough that we should not add any additional delay. We have identified a list of issues that we want to fix before branching, and I suggest that we should feel free to branch as soon as these items are resolved. Anything extra should not delay the 7.0 release. We can certainly discuss individual contributions and decide whether they should be made part of the 7.0 release, but anything else can wait for the next release cycle, which we can make as early after 7.0 as we want. -- Joel