Kean Johnston wrote: >> I'd appreciate feedback. (I don't promise to be bound by the majority >> view, though.) > > I seem to recall in the past that they did patch releases. > From both a tagging purity point of view and reproducability > point ov view, why not create a branch off 4.0.2, apply the > fixes that were missed, tag it as 4.0.2.1 and release that?
Thanks to all who provided feedback. Here's what I'm going to do: 1. Move the ChangeLog entries on the 4.0 branch to accurately reflect the released bits. 2. Modify Bugzilla to reset the target milestone for the three PRs in question. 3. Modify gcc_release to prevent this situation in future. I've decided not to do another release. I think it's too much effort for too little gain. The C++ and m68k patches are things that might just as easily not have been applied in the first place; we certainly wouldn't have considered either PR a showstopper. The Solaris problem is unfortunate, but I think not fatal. However, I will try to do a 4.0.3 release in the relatively near future. I had previously indicated that I would focus exclusively on 4.1, and I still plan to do that primarily, but I'll work in a 4.0.3 at some point. I very much apologize for the mistake. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] (916) 791-8304
