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 <mar...@trippelsdorf.de> wrote: > On 2015.03.21 at 12:11 -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:45 AM, Markus Trippelsdorf >> <mar...@trippelsdorf.de> 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 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 6.0, no? >> > >> > http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#num_scheme >> >> So according to that webpage, trunk becomes 6.0 and the first >> maintenance release of 5.0 becomes 5.1 (with 5.0.1 being the >> pre-release state of the gcc-5_0-branch prior to the actual 5.1 >> maintenance release). What is confusing me is all of these references >> in the mailing list to postponing bug fixes until 5.2 instead of 5.1 >> (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-03/msg01129.html for >> example). What is that all about? > > The first release of gcc-5 will be 5.1.0. There will be no 5.0.0 > release... > > -- > Markus
