incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tim Adams" <Tim.Ad...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: 4.2.1 platforms
Date Thu, 27 Mar 2008 03:16:03 GMT
Good point Martin.  I wasn't suggesting you "break a platform that was
working in a previous release", but I suppose I was being a bit
overzealous, mainstream support for Visual Studio 2003 doesn't end until
October 14th, this year.

-- Tim
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 8:45 PM
> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 4.2.1 platforms
> 
> Tim Adams wrote:
> > IBM dropped support for Visual Age 6 last spring.  So while you all 
> > may want to support it as a best effort platform, it probably 
> > shouldn't be a secondary platform.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback Tim. I was going to say: Sure thing! 
> but then I thought about it from the perspective of users of 
> these platforms who just want to get a few bugs fixed in stdcxx...
> 
> It makes sense to me as a general rule to move platform to 
> the Best Effort category when it ceases to be supported by 
> the vendor. Let me update our release process document.
> 
> For patch releases though, I'm not sure if it should be 
> considered acceptable to break a platform that worked in the 
> previous release.
> My feeling is that in bugfix releases users should be able to 
> rely on 100% compatibility with the previous release.
> 
> > I could state many reasons, but suffice it to say that IMHO 
> MSVC 7.1 
> > should also be on the best effort list.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> If Microsoft still supports MSVC 7.1 (I think that's Visual Studio
> 2003) we should, IMO, keep in the Secondary category unless 
> doing so makes things difficult. I don't have a very good 
> sense about how hard the MSVC 7.1 port is but unless it 
> causing us major headaches, using VisualAge 6 as a precedent 
> MSVC 7.1 should remain a Secondary Platform until 4.3.
> 
> Martin
> 
> > 
> > -- Tim
> >  
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin 
> >> Sebor
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:08 AM
> >> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
> >> Subject: 4.2.1 platforms
> >>
> >> Here's my proposed list of platforms for 4.2.1. I don't 
> think we can 
> >> quite meet the release goals outlined in the release 
> policy (I don't 
> >> see us cleaning up all the test failures and warnings on 
> all Primary
> >> platforms) but we might as well try to use the process to 
> the extent 
> >> we can.
> >>
> >> Let me know if I've missed something. Once we have the 
> final list I'd 
> >> like to open a vote on it.
> >>
> >> Primary:
> >>
> >>      HP aCC 6.16/HP-UX
> >>      HP aCC 3.74/HP-UX
> >>      gcc 3.4, 4/Linux
> >>      Intel C++ 10/Linux/Windows
> >>      MSVC 8.0, 9.0/Windows
> >>      Sun C++ 5.9/Solaris
> >>      XLC++ 9.0/AIX
> >>
> >> Secondary:
> >>
> >>      EDG eccp 3.9/Linux
> >>      gcc 3.2/Linux
> >>      gcc 3.4/FreeBSD
> >>      Intel C++ 9.1/Linux/Windows
> >>      MSVC 7.1/Windows
> >>      Sun C++ 5.9/Linux
> >>      Sun C++ 5.8, 5.7/Solaris
> >>      XLC++ 8.0, 7.0/AIX 5
> >>      VisualAge 6.0/AIX 5
> >>
> >> Best Effort:
> >>
> >>      EDG eccp 3.9/Solaris
> >>      gcc 4/Darwin
> >>      HP C++ /Tru64 UNIX 6.5
> >>      MIPSpro 7.41/IRIX 6.5
> >>      Sun C++ 5.3/Solaris
> >>
> > 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message