Re: future versions

2015-03-22 Thread Jack Howarth
So effectlvely the old usage of the major version has been discarded with the previous usage of the minor version mapped to it. Likewise for the previous usage of the patch version now mapped to the minor version. I am just trying to clarify this as I have to adjust my packaging of FSF gcc in the f

Re: future versions

2015-03-22 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 22 March 2015 at 17:28, Jack Howarth wrote: > Is this the policy going forward for the 6.0 release as well? Yes, as it says on that webpage. > If it is > being done just to avoid the stigma of a .0 release, it really smacks > of being too cute by half. That's not the reason, there's a rationa

Re: future versions

2015-03-22 Thread Jack Howarth
Is this the policy going forward for the 6.0 release as well? If it is being done just to avoid the stigma of a .0 release, it really smacks of being too cute by half. On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2015.03.21 at 12:11 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 21

Re: future versions

2015-03-21 Thread Markus Trippelsdorf
On 2015.03.21 at 12:11 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf > wrote: > > On 2015.03.20 at 20:08 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > >> What was the final decision concerning future versioning of FSF > >> gcc post-5.0? In particular, I am confused about the

Re: future versions

2015-03-21 Thread Jack Howarth
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > On 2015.03.20 at 20:08 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >> What was the final decision concerning future versioning of FSF >> gcc post-5.0? In particular, I am confused about the designation of >> maintenance releases of 5.0. Will the nex

Re: future versions

2015-03-20 Thread Markus Trippelsdorf
On 2015.03.20 at 20:08 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > What was the final decision concerning future versioning of FSF > gcc post-5.0? In particular, I am confused about the designation of > maintenance releases of 5.0. Will the next maintenance release be 5.1 > or 5.0.1? I assume if it is 5.1, th

future versions

2015-03-20 Thread Jack Howarth
What was the final decision concerning future versioning of FSF gcc post-5.0? In particular, I am confused about the designation of maintenance releases of 5.0. Will the next maintenance release be 5.1 or 5.0.1? I assume if it is 5.1, then after branching for release of 5.0, trunk will become 6