Re: [cdt-dev] Re: [cdt-debug-dev] CDT 1.2.0.50 success story for arm JT

["Mikhail Khodjaiants" <mikhailk@xxxxxxx>]

I agree with Doug and Dave on this.

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Inglis" <dinglis@xxxxxxx>
To: <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Re: [cdt-debug-dev] CDT 1.2.0.50 success story for
arm JTAG eCos


> I agree with Doug on this one, I vote to wait till end of month before
> we branch...
>
> Douglas Schaefer wrote:
>
> >I would only agree with creating the branch now if we felt that merging
> >fixes from the 1.2 branch to HEAD will be relatively painless.  I get the
> >feeling there will still be a good chunk of churn leading up to "code
> >freeze" at the end of Sept and would prefer we get to that point before
> >branching.
> >
> >Doug Schaefer, Senior Software Developer
> >IBM Rational Software, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
> >
> >
> >
> >Sebastien Marineau <sebastien@xxxxxxx>
> >Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >09/19/2003 12:50 PM
> >Please respond to
> >cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >To
> >"'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >cc
> >
> >Subject
> >RE: [cdt-dev] Re: [cdt-debug-dev] CDT 1.2.0.50 success story for arm JTAG
> >eCos
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Please don't die on me Alain.  You're quite valuable to this
> >>project, I
> >>don't want to give you a coronary.
> >>
> >>Today is supposed to be feature freeze date.  Thus, from
> >>Monday on (since
> >>the weekend still counts as today :-) ) we are only supposed
> >>to be fixing
> >>bugs.
> >>There is no reason why we couldn't cut the branch on Monday
> >>and thus put
> >>things that we weren't counting on as being in 1.2 (like this
> >>feature,
> >>IMO) in the HEAD.
> >>
> >>Otherwise, what criteria should we be using for screening new
> >>features/patches for 1.2?  Who will be testing it or
> >>supplying docs upon
> >>it?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I'd suggest we cut the branch for 1.2 ASAP (e.g. Monday) to allow us
> >to ship 1.2 on schedule. You are absolutely correct that we need to
> >stabilize and focus on bugfixing over the next few weeks.
> >
> >+1 on branching Monday.
> >
> >Sebastien
> >
> >
> >
> >>JohnC
> >>
> >>cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 09/19/2003 11:55:55 AM:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Sent to cdt-dev rather than debug-dev:=20
> >>>>Should we cut a 1.2 branch soon?  Is this feature going
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>into 1.2?=20
> >>
> >>
> >>>Do you want to give me a heart attack?
> >>>
> >>>Folks here was under the impression that the freeze/branch is at the
> >>>end of Steptember.
> >>>Did we get our wires cross ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>cdt-dev mailing list
> >>>cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >>>
> >>>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>cdt-dev mailing list
> >>cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdt-dev mailing list
> >cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdt-dev mailing list
> >cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>