This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
GDB 6.1 branch 2004-02-26-gmt
- From: Andrew Cagney <cagney at gnu dot org>
- To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 19:34:02 -0500
- Subject: GDB 6.1 branch 2004-02-26-gmt
Hello,
It's time has come. Things appear to have died down, and the backlog
sufficiently drained, for the GDB 6.1 branch to be cut. With about a
week's notice I'm planning on:
-D 2004-02-26-gmt
as the branch date. If things go to plan, that makes the ideal release
date:
-D 2004-04-14-gmt (6 weeks)
So can I suggest treating the next week as something of a quiet period
(....).
Right now the bug database shows:
378 ``GNU/Linux'' ``Linux kernel''
as the only high/build PR (that can't be right).
enjoy,
Andrew
PS: Branch Commit Policy
The branch commit policy is pretty slack.
@itemize @bullet
@item
The @file{gdb/MAINTAINERS} file still holds.
@item
Don't fix something on the branch unless/until it is also fixed in the
trunk. If this isn't possible, mentioning it in the @file{gdb/PROBLEMS}
file is better than committing a hack.
@item
When considering a patch for the branch, suggested criteria include:
Does it fix a build? Does it fix the sequence @kbd{break main; run}
when debugging a static binary?
@item
The further a change is from the core of @value{GDBN}, the less likely
the change will worry anyone (e.g., target, architecture, or system
specific code).
@item
Only post a proposal to change the core of @value{GDBN} after you've
sent individual bribes to all the people listed in the
@file{MAINTAINERS} file @t{;-)}
@item
Only the very brave or very foolish would try to apply the obvious fix
rule to the branch.
@end itemize
@emph{Pragmatics: Provided updates are restricted to non-core
functionality there is little chance that a broken change will be fatal.
This means that changes such as adding a new architectures or (within
reason) support for a new host are considered acceptable.}