On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 02:21:29PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > > > The release management team has aggreed to go forward with the > > change to bump the major with each further release. > > > > The following aims to document the details of the versioning scheme we > > intend to use for GCC 5 and up. > > > > Summary in non-html: Development of GCC 5 will happen as > > GCC 5.0.0 (experimental), once we enter regression-fixing-only mode > > (post-stage3) it will become GCC 5.0.1 (prerelease). The > > GCC 5 release itself will be numbered GCC 5.1.0 and development > > on the branch will continue as GCC 5.1.1 followed by a GCC 5.2.0 > > release and GCC 5.2.1 branch development. Stage1 of GCC 6 will > > bump us to GCC 6.0.0. > > > > Ok for www? > > Looks good to me, though, can you please add <a name="num_scheme">...</a> > to the title? Would like to refer to that from index.html.
Will do. > Here is my current set of changes (note, I have changed bugzilla to use > [4.9/5 Regression] and similar subjects instead of > [4.9/4.10 Regression] and renamed 4.10.0 version and milestones. > > Perhaps we should also change all 4.10.0 in Known to work and Known to fail > fields? Yeah, I suppose we can script that later when somebody figures out the mysql database field. > --- develop.html 16 Jul 2014 14:01:06 -0000 1.143 > +++ develop.html 13 Aug 2014 12:40:48 -0000 > @@ -502,6 +502,10 @@ stages of development, branch points, an > | v > | GCC 4.9.1 release (2014-07-16) > | > + New GCC versioning scheme announced > + | > + GCC 5 Stage 1 > + | > v > > </pre> > --- index.html 30 Jul 2014 17:57:07 -0000 1.933 > +++ index.html 13 Aug 2014 12:40:48 -0000 > @@ -52,6 +52,10 @@ mission statement</a>.</p> > > <dl class="news"> > > +<dt><span>New GCC version numbering <a href="develop.html">scheme</a> > announced</span> > + <span class="date">[2014-08-13]</span></dt> > + <dd></dd> > + > <dt><span><a href="gcc-4.9/">GCC 4.9.1</a> released</span> > <span class="date">[2014-07-16]</span></dt> > <dd></dd> > @@ -165,17 +169,17 @@ Any additions? Don't be shy, send them > <a href="gcc-5/changes.html">changes</a>) > </dt><dd> > Status: > - <!--GCC 5.0 status below--> > + <!--GCC 5 status below--> > <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2014-04/msg00090.html";>2014-04-11</a> > - <!--GCC 5.0 status above--> > + <!--GCC 5 status above--> > (general development, stage 1). > <br /> > <span class="regress"> > <a > - > href="https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=4.10&target_milestone=4.8.4&target_milestone=4.9.2&target_milestone=4.10.0&known_to_fail_type=allwordssubstr&known_to_work_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&gcchost=&gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&gcctarget=&gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&gccbuild=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&priority=P1&priority=P2&priority=P3&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&fie ld0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=">Serious > + > href="https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=5&target_milestone=4.8.4&target_milestone=4.9.2&target_milestone=5.0&known_to_fail_type=allwordssubstr&known_to_work_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&gcchost=&gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&gcctarget=&gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&gccbuild=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&priority=P1&priority=P2&priority=P3&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0- 0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=">Serious > regressions</a>. > <a > - > href="https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=4.10&target_milestone=4.8.4&target_milestone=4.9.2&target_milestone=4.10.0&known_to_fail_type=allwordssubstr&known_to_work_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&gcchost=&gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&gcctarget=&gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&gccbuild=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0="; >All > + > href="https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=5&target_milestone=4.8.4&target_milestone=4.9.2&target_milestone=5.0&known_to_fail_type=allwordssubstr&known_to_work_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&gcchost_type=allwordssubstr&gcchost=&gcctarget_type=allwordssubstr&gcctarget=&gccbuild_type=allwordssubstr&gccbuild=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=SUSPENDED&bug_status=WAITING&bug_status=REOPENED&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=";>All > regressions</a>. > </span> > </dd> > --- releasing.html 27 Jun 2014 18:53:31 -0000 1.45 > +++ releasing.html 13 Aug 2014 12:40:48 -0000 > @@ -60,9 +60,8 @@ also files such as <code>/some/where/gcc > > <li>Upload the release to ftp.gnu.org.</li> > > -<li>Increment the version number in <code>gcc/BASE-VER</code>. Restore > -the word "prerelease" (without the quotation marks) to > -<code>gcc/DEV-PHASE</code>. Check these files in.</li> > +<li>Increment the version number in <code>gcc/BASE-VER</code>. > +<code>gcc/DEV-PHASE</code> remains empty. Check the file in.</li> Hmm, before the release increment the minor version and set the patchlevel to zero, after the release increment the patchlevel version? Otherwise looks ok. Thanks, Richard.
