DIP75 - Release Process

Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sat Mar 7 11:15:12 PST 2015

On 7 Mar 2015 19:05, "Dicebot via Digitalmars-d" <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> Nice to see more attention to this topic. On a negative side, it doesn't
seem to be that different from what we already supposed to have (though it
seems to imply getting rid of those annoying cherry-picks, if yes, that is
pretty good)
> In my opinion two main problems with proposed scheme are these:
> 1) Making solid release takes weeks from branching point. Fitting into
strict schedule doesn't seem to be possible with current available
resources, not without compromising regression control.
> 2) Separation between bug-fixes and feature additions is impractical in D
reality. I can't remember when I had upgrade issues because of new features
- it is almost always a legitimate fix that breaks the code. It is
backwards compatibility that should define difference between major and
minor versions, not "feature vs bugfix".
> Good long-term release process should also take into account that GDC is
naturally bound to GCC release cycle and having drastically different
feature set introduces risk of fragmentation.

Likewise, distributions that ship GDC may have longer support cycles.

One wishlist to the dlang website would be to have versioned
documentation.  For instance, pydocs let you switch between versions of a
library so you can read the documentation relevant to your installed D
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20150307/17ab4089/attachment.html>

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list