This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: 2.22.1 Possible -> Yes!

On Apr 27, 2012, at 5:41 AM, Alan Modra wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:07:27PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> a release from trunk means 2.23, not another 2.22.
> What matters the number?

Well, there are guidelines and expectations.
That's a detail anyway.

>> i also don't think you can 
>> say that the trunk is that much better considering it hasn't been released and 
>> tested on distros for a variety of targets.
> I do claim that.  I can claim that based on the number of bugs I know
> have been fixed on trunk but not on the branch.  I also know that
> people use trunk binutils in production, and HJ releases binutils
> effectively off trunk all the time, so it's not as if trunk is only
> tested by developers.  Even distros use trunk snapshots as their base
> for binutils, eg. RHEL6.3 is based on binutils-

Like many others, I agree with you.  There are some instabilities periods, but they are rare and short.

>> if trunk really truly was as well 
>> tested & stable as you say, then we wouldn't have releases which were badly 
>> broken for some targets.  this isn't anything specific to the 2.22 branch 
>> point, just a reality of development -- bugs slip through.  every release has 
>> its own set of issues.
> Long release cycles tend to break less used targets.  I think my
> suggestion will allow shorter release cycles, simply because the
> release process will not impact developer time so much.

If you want to talk about release cycle, I think this deserve a real thread and maybe a live discussion (at Prague ?)
My current schedule is one major release every year.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]