[dmd-internals] [dmd-beta] Time for new beta

[Brad Roberts]

On 5/28/2012 5:34 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/28/2012 1:07 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> There's an analogy that we like to use at work, and in my experience it holds pretty well for code quality and bleeds
>> pretty well into the entire development process:
>>
>>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
>>
>> We do an ok job when it comes to the tests (though certainly not perfect).  We've been getting a lot better at
>> addressing regressions, though there's still 4 open right now (1 phobos, 2 druntime, 1 dmd).  Can we please make the
>> remaining open regressions a release blocker?
> 
> My idea is more along the lines of at least having it not be *worse* than the previous release. That would be one
> regression at this point, which has an outstanding pull request.

Fully agree, but we are within reach of 0 open regressions, so let's close that gap now and keep it there.  The longer
we wait the easier it is to wait just a little more.  If that's not practical for this release (and I'm not accepting
that premise), can we commit NOW that the next release will be at 0 open regression bugs as a release criteria?

>> What's stopping us from handling all pull requests w/in a week?  Or even better a day or two?
> 
> Currently I'm working on the 64 bit struct ABI, which is marked as a critical blocker (a sentiment I agree with).

For the scope of this thread, let's set dmd aside and focus on the rest.  The rate of DMD pull requests and their being
committed is already higher than all the other components combined (863 closed for dmd vs 821 for the rest).  That
there's 97 open dmd pulls is a problem, but considering the bottleneck known as you, it's still doing remarkably good by
comparison.