dmd 1.045 / 2.030 release

[Christopher Wright]

Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Walter Bright, el 12 de mayo a las 09:40 me escribiste:
>> Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote:
>>> Is there a reason for the missing announcement ?
>> Yes, I sent it to people who'd asked for a prerelease so they could
>> check their builds against it.
> 
> I think a better way to do prereleases is to do a "full" release but mark
> it as a release candidate.
> 
> For example, make a DMD 1.045rc release. Wait a week, if nobody complains,
> release DMD 1.045. If somebody complains, fix the bug, make a DMD
> 1.045rc2, etc (normally the final would be the same as the rc, and there
> should be very rare cases where a rc2+ would be needed). Maybe it's
> a little more work, but I'm sure the prerelease will get a lot more
> testing than a hidden release and people won't get confused thinking that
> something that is in the website ready for download and looks like a final
> release, really is a "hidden prerelease".
> 
> Anyways, I think pre-releasing is great and it's better to have it this
> way than not having them at all.

-rc is good when you have long release cycles. It isn't appropriate for 
dmd, which has very short release cycles.

If dmd had public source control, we could set up continuous integration 
for it that will, for instance, run dstress and attempt to compile the 
latest release of various common libraries. Then Walter can just check 
its results when he wants to do a release -- depending on how long that 
takes to run.