How about a compatibility list?

[Don]

Lutger wrote:
> Christopher Wright wrote:
> 
>> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> "Saaa" <empty at needmail.com> wrote in message 
>>> news:gqjjp3$jrg$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>> Who is going to do the work of reviewing these libraries for 
>>>>> compatibility?
>>>> The people :)
>>>> like in the wine database.
>>> I would think some of that work could be automated. Of course, setting up 
>>> the automation could mean a fair bit of work...
>> You would need an acceptance testing framework. Otherwise you couldn't 
>> tell whether the project does more than compile.
>>
>> Granted, for D1 certainly, there have been only few changes that cause 
>> semantic changes without syntactic changes. But in D2, that is not 
>> necessarily the case.
> 
> I don't think that is needed to make such a list useful. Even if only some 
> people vote for compatibility with compilers and could post comments, that 
> would be useful to track down the state of affairs.
> 
A non-compatibility list might be enough, and it's a lot less work. (Ie, 
"compatible" only means "hasn't yet been shown to be incompatible"). Any 
inactive project, once marked as non-compatible, is obviously going to 
stay that way.