Next focus: PROCESS

Andrei Alexandrescu SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Wed Dec 19 13:30:44 PST 2012


On 12/19/12 4:23 PM, foobar wrote:
> On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 20:51:57 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 19 December 2012 at 19:56:47 UTC, Rob T wrote:
>>
>>> Do we all agree that we need a "stable" branch?
>>>
>>
>> No. Stable isn't a boolean criteria. You'll find different degree of
>> stability going from not so stable (dev version) to very stable (dead
>> project).
>>
>> The wiki already mention a process with a branch per version of the
>> software.
>
> Let's generalize this point for the sake of reaching consensus - we need
> _at least one_ "stable" branch which is separate from "staging". We are
> still conflicted as to what should be the maximum amount. For the
> record, I'm with the camp advocating at most a fixed amount countable on
> one hand. That's an O(1) with a very small constant as opposed to the
> O(n) suggestion by Andrei. I hope Andrei appreciates the order of
> efficiency here.

I agree with one "stable" branch.

Andrei


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list