On Fri, 13 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Or what about branching now and starting the gcc 4.5 development > cycle? The argument against this, that the same changes will have to
There might also be the temptation to create a trunk-substitute branch to receive Stage 1 developments and branch merges until such can go on trunk itself. But this would not be appropriate given the SC statement the last time this was done <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-01/msg01531.html>. In addition, if an early trunk commit for 4.5 were a merge of a branch with a bunch of unrelated changes, that would be a pain for future binary searches for regressions that track them to such a commit. Declaring that 4.4 will be branched based on past revision X once the licensing issues have been resolved (and moving trunk to Stage 1) would also be problematic as it would prevent an FSF or SC decision that the new license terms must be present on the branch from the point at which it is created. Given the SC request we need to stay in Stage 4 rather than trying to work around it. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
