> On Jan 9, 2019, at 3:42 AM, Tom de Vries <tdevr...@suse.de> wrote:
>
> [ To revisit https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-04/msg00385.html ]
>
> The current formulation for the description of Stage 4 here (
> https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html ) is:
> ...
> During this period, the only (non-documentation) changes that may be
> made are changes that fix regressions.
>
> Other changes may not be done during this period.
>
> Note that the same constraints apply to release branches.
>
> This period lasts until stage 1 opens for the next release.
> ...
>
> This updated formulation was proposed by Richi (with a request for
> review of wording):
> ...
> During this period, the only (non-documentation) changes that may
> be made are changes that fix regressions.
>
> -Other changes may not be done during this period.
> +Other important bugs like wrong-code, rejects-valid or build issues may
> +be fixed as well. All changes during this period should be done with
> +extra care on not introducing new regressions - fixing bugs at all cost
> +is not wanted.
...
Is there, or should there be, a distinction between primary and non-primary
platforms? While platform bugs typically require fixes in platform-specific
code, I would think we would want to stay away from bugfixes in minor platforms
during stage 4. The wording seems to say that I could fix wrong-code bugs in
pdp11 during stage 4; I have been assuming I should not do that. Is this
something that should be explicitly stated?
paul
