D versionning

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-07-13 00:24, Adam Wilson wrote:

> For example:
> 2.0.60 is the current HEAD. Bug fixes Only.
> 2.1.60 is the new feature branch. It is a GitHub fork of the current
> DMD-HEAD owned by the same org as current DMD-HEAD. This way Walter can
> work against both simultaneously.
>
> We could have rolled the Object const change in 2.1.60, found out we
> didn't like them but instead of being FORCED to revert it to keep 2.060
> stable, we could have continued developing and improving the model or
> working on the problem from a completely different angle, WITHOUT
> affecting the release of 2.0.60.
>
> We could keep all the COFF work in the DMD 2.1 branch without affecting
> DMD 2.0 branch and having nearly as many breakages as we currently do in
> HEAD. Most recently, the ElfObj breakage. Roll that work into 2.1.60 and
> if it breaks well, you KNEW you were on the development branch, what's
> your problem?
>
> The stable/development branch model exists for a reason, it works, well.
> We don't have to keep rediscovering the models that worked successfully
> for other teams the hard way. If we proactively seek best practices, we
> can proactively avoid a huge amount of pain.

Yeah, I still don't understand why we don't do this. Is Walter against 
this? Anyone else?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg