This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.23 --- Hard freeze starting
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:50:38 +0000
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.23 --- Hard freeze starting
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <569D4A42 dot 7030006 at linaro dot org> <569D61E9 dot 1080501 at redhat dot com> <569D6754 dot 4080300 at redhat dot com> <569DD058 dot 6060500 at cs dot ucla dot edu> <569E7AE1 dot 1080201 at redhat dot com> <569E8894 dot 3040607 at linaro dot org>
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> My understanding is we set a long freeze period (usually a month) to exact
> iron out these kind of discussions. The freeze is exactly to limit discussion
> to a limited number of topics to avoid backlog overflow.
I think the freeze is to allow plenty of time for architecture maintainers
to test for their architectures and fix problems found (so that it
shouldn't, for example, be a problem if some architecture maintainers are
away at the start of the freeze period) - and potentially for any extra
testing people wish to run while changes likely to invalidate it shouldn't
be going in. Not for adding new architecture-independent ABIs or other
changes that strongly indicate architecture maintainers should revalidate
(any new ABI means architecture maintainers should at least confirm the
ABI tests still pass).
Joseph S. Myers