[dmd-beta] 2.065 Final Release Prep

[Andrew Edwards]

On 2/24/14, 2:34 AM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Andrew Edwards <edwards.ac at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/24/14, 1:54 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>>> I don't think merging back into master is feasible at this point.  We have
>>> been merging fixes to master first, then cherry-picking/rebasing them to the
>>> release branch, and I don't think a merge to master is necessary or
>>> desirable with this model.
>>>
>> Make sense to me.
> Please don't just skip over the entire earlier discussion like this.
>
> @Daniel: I'd argue that it is only really necessary and desirable
> precisely in that model, because the Git history holds all the merging
> information otherwise anyway. But I really thought we were done with
> this discussion some weeks ago…
>
David, I honestly think this is a waste of time. Since nothing is 
directly implemented into 2.065 (everything contained in it were either 
cherry-picked directly or via pull request from master) my path to 
resolving all of these issues ends up being the same. I review the 
commit history and see which changes effectively caused the divergence. 
In every case, master's current state is a natural progressing from 
where 2.065 was extracted so I end up choosing to keep what's in master 
as the  resolution path. This is a lot of time wasted or zero gain: time 
that can be better spent doing things that are important, like tracking 
and picking changes that address regressions to 2.065.0 in preparation 
for a point release and preparing the beta release for 2.066.