State of Play

[Leandro Lucarella]

Don, el 27 de marzo a las 10:58 me escribiste:
> Brad Roberts wrote:
> >Bill Baxter wrote:
> >>On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Leandro Lucarella <llucax at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>Walter Bright, el 26 de marzo a las 16:58 me escribiste:
> >>>>Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> >>>>>It's not the bugs that you know about that cause problems for other people!
> >>>>Half-baked implementations won't help them, either. I just don't think
> >>>>the answer is, what is in essence, a lot more releases.
> >>>Millions of open source projects that work that way can prove you wrong.
> >>
> >>I think part of the problem with the current approach is that the
> >>"stable" D releases seem to have no connection with reality.  It's
> >>always been way older than it should be every time I've looked.  I
> >>wouldn't recommend that anyone use 1.030 right now.  I'd say 1.037
> >>should be the most recent "stable" version at the moment.   It seems
> >>there isn't a good process in place for figuring out what's stable and
> >>what's not.
> >>
> >>It seems to me the only people who would know which compilers deserve
> >>the "stable" label are the folks using dmd on a daily basis to build
> >>their software.  Yet I've never seen the question come up here or
> >>anywhere else of what version of D the users find to be the most
> >>stable.   My impression is frankly that Walter just arbitrarily slaps
> >>the label on a rev that's about 10 steps back from current.  Probably
> >>there's more to it than that, but that's what it seems like.
> >>
> >>--bb
> >Actually it's more like he moves it forward when conversations like this
> >come up and point out how far behind it is.  I'm not sure I've seen it
> >ever pro-actively moved forward, only re-actively. :)
> >Later,
> >Brad
> 
> Yes. I think I was responsible for the provoking two of the three
> changes that have occured. I don't like that at all. I think what's
> really lacking is a process for declaring a revision as stable. Then,
> library developers would need to agree to make sure to verify that
> everything works with the last version which is declared as stable.
> 
> It'd also be nice to mark in the changelog as soon as a version is known
> to be broken, so that more people don't download it.

Make beta/release candidate release!

If code is in a SCM is much more simpler, you can simply say: "hey,
people, a new release is comming next week, can you download current <SCM>
version and see if all works good?". You don't even have to go throgh
a complete release process.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASALTAN, GOLPEAN SALVAJEMENTE A ANCIANA Y LE COMEN LA PASTAFROLA.
	-- Crónica TV