DMD 1.032 and 2.016 releases

[Bill Baxter]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> I agree that there is no particular need to upgrade, although new DMD
>> releases tend to have bugfixes that are important to Tango users.
>> Furthermore, D users expect any D 1.0 library to work with the next DMD
>> 1.0xx compiler release, it is a stable branch after all. When this 
>> does not
>> happen, i.e the compiler has a breaking change, there is some furious 
>> work
>> at our end to figure out what the heck is wrong, with potentially quite a
>> few requests and pings from the users (I speak from experience).
> 
> I apologize for that.

Maybe you can demonstrate the sincerity of your apology by getting a 
1.032r1 version out the door in the next few days, which does nothing 
but fix these regressions.

The problem as I see it is that you keep changing too many things.  If 
after reports of regressions came in you just regularly cranked out a 
new release that fixed *only* those, then everybody could be satisfied I 
think.

In effect it would be like a pre-release system, except _everybody_ 
would get the same chance to try the pre-releases, and in the event that 
no regressions are found in the release, there's no need to re-release.

Anyway I think it's clear that /something/ needs to be done if you're 
really serious about making D1 a stable branch.  And this seems like it 
would be the least painful option for you.

--bb