From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C5FBB81 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:33:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2NGXXUQ024845 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:33:33 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA09461 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:33:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from [128.93.11.95] (estephe.inria.fr [128.93.11.95]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k2NGXW8G002532 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:33:32 +0100 Message-ID: <4422CDDC.9010306@inria.fr> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:33:32 +0100 From: Xavier Leroy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050322) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Markus Mottl Cc: ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] CVS-release309 production-ready? References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4422CDDD.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4422CDDC.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 bug:01 bug:01 cvs:01 caml-list:01 usable:01 patches:02 patches:02 fixes:05 fixes:05 i'd:05 inria:06 inria:06 xavier:06 xavier:06 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 > I'd like to know whether the current CVS-release of OCaml with tag > release309, which contains two recent bug fixes that are important to us > (I/O and signals related), is considered safe by INRIA for production > use. The patches for the two bug fixes seem correct to me, but there > are a couple of other changes (e.g. in code generation, etc.) about > which I don't know much about. Are these other patches still going to > see more testing before official release? We got no negative feedback about the recent changes in the 3.09 branch. We will do some more testing before the 3.09.2 release, which will probably take place in April. But I'm reasonably confident that the current CVS 3.09 branch is usable. - Xavier Leroy