From owner-freebsd-current Sun Sep 1 15:36: 8 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25EF537B400; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 15:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from beppo.feral.com (beppo.feral.com [192.67.166.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623DF43E3B; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 15:35:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from wonky.feral.com (wonky.feral.com [192.67.166.7]) by beppo.feral.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g81MZsv11275; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 15:35:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 15:34:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: To: Peter Wemm Cc: , Subject: Re: HEADS UP: GCC 3.2 in progress In-Reply-To: <20020901222917.EC4BB2A893@canning.wemm.org> Message-ID: <20020901152935.P16984-100000@wonky.feral.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG These arguments are all quite familiar- I'm not really moved one way or the other. The point here is that major changes need to be very visible on a product's schedule. You can argue that it isn't a major change- but I'd assert that any toolchain change *is* a major change. I'm *not* arguing against the change- I don't know nearly enough to have an opinion. I *am* commenting on how major changes coming in with little notice often add substantial delays. Furthermore, lack of putting such changes up in such a fashion that a folks in distributed development environment can then adequately plan/protect themselves so *their* stuff is protected is also an issue. Look- if Alexander hadn't said anything, I *probably* wouldn't have noticed. However, he felt that this was important enough to tease people with a "10 minutes until the bombs start falling" mail message. It's not unreasonable to raise this as an issue. Or if you think it *is* unreasonable, we can go offline so I can discuss it. -matt On Sun, 1 Sep 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: > Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > This would have been a firing offense at several companies I've worked > > at. It's not unreasonable to take a lesson from *why* these things are > > firing offenses and start to raise queries. I've done so. Duty is done. > > Go back to sleep. > > Would you rather that we ship with a known broken prerelease compiler? > > Would you rather that we changed from 3.1-prerelease to 3.1.1-release? > > gcc-3.2 *is* 'gcc-3.1.1 + ABI bugfix'. They renamed the 3.1 branch to 3.2. > All future 3.1.x releases will be called 3.2.x. > > Cheers, > -Peter > -- > Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com > "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message