D Stable Proposal

[1100110]

On 11/30/2012 04:22 AM, Robert wrote:
> My github account is eskimor. I think the model described in:
> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
I have just been reading that for advice and find the --no-ff comments 
confusing.  Can you explain that please?  I see two contradicting claims.

Also you have been added as a member.

> is a really good one, to get started. If we want to keep changes to a
> minimum, then the development branch in the model could simply be the
> current master.
>
> The master branch in the model would be the master branch of dmd-stable.
>
I agree that we should be smart about this, but I'm not quite following 
you.  Please explain the best design that you have in mind.

In my mind, stable is just an abstraction over the stable branch, we 
should be working as close to the development branch as we can, to 
prevent useless duplication.

> Feature branches already exist in form of pull requests.
>
> Release/hotfix branches would have to be introduced. A little education
> of people would be needed. (E.g. where and when to merge things,
> bugs/features.) Where and how changes are documented.
>
Exactly. We develop a standard. We follow that standard.


> I would volunteer to help writing an automatic upgrade tool. We should,
> define things there, so reports of breaking changes/deprecations, the
> developers provide, could then be already in a format the tool can
> understand.
>

Very good!  And yes, I think that a proper automatic upgrade tool(and 
warning system!) should work with the existing systems as much as 
possible.  That would be beautiful.

You are in the "Trusted" team on the project since everything is in 
flux.  Expect to move or be moved to a team that is limited to something 
similar to a tools repo for what you want to work on.

If you want to actually get started, I'll create a Tools repo(or a 
better name?) and give you commit access.  But right now, you do not 
have commit access.