D 2.066 is out. Enjoy!
Idan Arye via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce at puremagic.com
Tue Aug 19 00:53:37 PDT 2014
On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 05:03:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 August 2014 at 04:26:48 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
> wrote:
>> Well that's what happened - someone started 2.067. What's the
>> advantage of doing this? Now we need to worry about master and
>> 2.067 instead of just master. -- Andrei
>
>
> Well, what you do at that point is just fix all of the
> regressions on the branch, and when it's ready you do another
> release. You don't put anything else on it. All of the normal
> dev work goes on master. And some point after the branch has
> been released as the next release, you branch again.
>
> Now, unless we have enough regressions on master that it's
> going to take us over a month to fix them, I think that
> branching right after releasing is a bit much, though if some
> of the regressions are bad enough, maybe it would make sense to
> release faster. And given how long we've been trying to get
> 2.066 ready after branching it and how much work has been done
> on master since then, maybe it makes sense. I don't know.
>
> I would have thought though that we'd aim to branch something
> like 2 to 4 weeks after releasing and then take about a month
> to make sure that all regressions are fixed so that we get a
> release about every two months. All the major dev work just
> continues on master, and it'll end up on a branch about every
> two months staggered from when that branch gets released as an
> official release.
>
> Certainly, aiming for something along those lines would get us
> faster releases than we've been doing. We've been waiting way
> too long to branch and then been rather slow about getting
> through all of the regressions. By branching earlier, we should
> be able to release more quickly.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
In that case, shouldn't it be 2.066.1?
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list