Compile all-of-dub?

[ponce via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 13:48:16 UTC, qznc wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 12:02:55 UTC, Jacob Carlborg 
> wrote:
>> I think it's a great idea. This has been suggested before. The 
>> objections were that:
>>
>> * If you do find a problem who should be responsible for 
>> figuring out if it's a regression or an intended change?
>
> It does raise the bar for language changes. Most changes should 
> be backwards compatible. For intended changes it forces us to 
> come up with a way to automatically detect and ideally fix it 
> (dfix?).
>
> In an ideal world, I would imagine it like this: Tester finds a 
> package breaks. Package is on Github, so Tester can file an 
> issue there. Tester checks out the source from repo, runs dfix, 
> sends pull request referencing the issue.
>
>> * Not all packages are maintained enough to keep up with all 
>> compiler changes
>
> Then it would be quite interesting to know about this and 
> provide this information at code.dlang.org, like "broken for 
> 2.068.0 and above".

There was a thread in announce in the last 12 months that 
announced a site (was it ddocs.org?) that had documentation for 
every package in the DUB registry, for each tag. I think it also 
reported build problems. Don't know why it went offline.