From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: GDB 5.2 or GDB 5.1.1?
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 12:52:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C473989.4090601@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C43B0FF.9000506@cygnus.com>
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking over all the things in my 5.1.1 folder and am beginning to think that it might be better if instead just move onto 5.2. I really don't know if it is worth all the effort (well mine and a few others) of pulling those changes onto a branch. All the C++ fixes, the HP/UX host stuff and so on.
>
> For this to work, all the proposed release criteria for 5.2 would need to be droped.
>
> thoughts?
>
> Either way, there needs to be a decision by the middle of next week.
>
>
> Just a postscript to this. Because the FSF would like to be able to spin out a manual based on a current release but are currently fixing things I'll very likely end up spinning out a 5.1.1 or 5.1.0.2 (ulgh) anyway. The latter is far far easier.
>
> However I do still have a preference for cutting 5.2 rather than spend lots of effort getting fixes into the 5.1 branch.
>
> I guess the question I'm asking here is, how much stuff has been added to the 5.1 branch that might break things making a fast 5.1.1 a high risk activity.
For lack of opinion other than Daniel (thanks for the comments). I'm
going to:
Roll out 5.1.1 on ~24rd of Jan GMT (~23 in US). I need to do something
to address the (C) issues and I think this has the greatest benefit.
Please don't rush to put things onto that branch.
Branch 5.2 ~23 Feb
Release 5.2 ~23 Mar
--
The numbers aren't totally made up. 5.1 was branched July and released
November (4 months). The above cuts the branch life down to one month
so ...
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-01-17 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-01-09 13:57 Andrew Cagney
2002-01-09 15:20 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-01-09 15:30 ` Elena Zannoni
2002-01-09 16:38 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-14 20:33 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-17 12:52 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2002-01-17 14:39 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-01-15 6:05 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-01-15 7:43 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3C473989.4090601@cygnus.com \
--to=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox