[dmd-beta] beta branch name

Fri Jan 24 05:47:39 PST 2014

The branch will be renamed tonight in preparation for building beta 2. I 
will make this change start building beta 2 at 10:00PM EST (UTC -5) so 
please ensure the auto tester is not using the release branch in order 
prevent any complications when it is renamed. Also just to verify that I 
am not causing any additional issues, the tags (aka version numbers) for 
the release will be as follows:

     2.65.0-b2

Obviously, this is another chance but mandatory to resolve issues with 
upgrading from installer packages on FreeBSD and Debian OSes.

Following are the changes I've cherry-picked into the release branch 
since beta 1.

     DMD
[REG2.061] Issue 11980 - startaddress pragma broken (pull request #3142)
     Issue 11974 - ICE(cast.c) Segfault with invalid assignment (pull 
request #3141)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11966 - inout(const(char))[] doesn't convert to 
inout(char)[] (pull request #3138)
     fix Issue 11956 - dmd doesn't lookup /etc/dmd.conf (pull request #3128)
Issue 11968 - ICE(expression.c) Crash when deleting __FILE__ (pull 
request #3139)
     Issue 11944 - ICE(expression.c) Assertion `f' failed. (pull request 
#3125)
fix Issue 11922 - [REG2.065a] ICE on nonexistent identifier in templated 
auto method (pull request #3094)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11924 - inout Variadic Template Parameters (pull 
request #3097)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11896 - isVirtualMethod related GitHub HEAD regression 
(pull request #3104)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11930 - Alias this not considered in is(T unused: U) 
matching (pull request #3105)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11931 - Linkers "Symbol Undefined" again with dmd HEAD 
when -g specified (pull request #3107)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11941 - Errors when appending to aggregate member 
array in CTFE (pull request #3112)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11967 - ICE(parse.c) Parser crash (pull request #3137)
[REG2.064] Issue 11965 - Segfault on garbage (pull request #3136)
[REG2.065a] Issue 11963 - ICE(parse.c) Parser crash (pull request #3135)

     Druntime
     None

     Phobos
     Remove duplicate ArchiveMember.madeVersion() property.

     Installer
Build the installer GUI for D2 on OS X (pull request #44)
add "dustmite" binary on deb/rpm packages (pull request #43)
don't zip .git* and .DS_Store files (pull request #42)
fix expanding zip files created on Windows (pull request #41)
     cleanup leftover from merge conflict (pull request #40)

     dlang.org
fix chmgen after renaming phobos.html => index.htm (pull request #480)
Revert changelog.dd encoding to UTF-8 (pull request #478)
     Changelog: add notes about std.uni.byGrapheme and std.range.only 
(pull request #477)
     2.065 changelog (pull request #476)

     tools
     None

If important you are expected to be included are not on the list, please 
identify them so I can adjust accordingly.

On 1/23/14, 11:03 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On 1/23/14 2:17 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Andrew Edwards <edwards.ac at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:edwards.ac at gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 1/23/14, 2:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>         I agree, I don't know what's wrong with what we had before:
>>
>>         1. All pull requests get merged to master
>>         2. Create 2.065 branch
>>         3. Cherry-pick from master to 2.065 as required
>>         4. Tag 2.065.whatever as releases get done on that branch
>>
>>         Easy, simple. All these other procedures seem like massive 
>> over-engineering to me.
>>
>>     Good to go... I for one did not see either of you weigh in on the 
>> proposal when Brad Roberts
>>
>>
>> Brad Anderson :P
>>
>>     made it
>> (http://forum.dlang.org/post/__CAFU1Uzpm4DBADOxMjcJ_Guj1=__T8BQ4nPb5OEbADNbUQDD2ijuQ@__mail.gmail.com
>> <http://forum.dlang.org/post/CAFU1Uzpm4DBADOxMjcJ_Guj1=T8BQ4nPb5OEbADNbUQDD2ijuQ@mail.gmail.com>).
>>     I decided to use it because, compared to the alternative of 
>> trying to convince volunteers to do
>>     something they do not want to, it would be much simpler for me to 
>> follow this scheme.
>>
>>
>> I wish I would have thought to email Brad directly (sorry, Brad) to 
>> make sure he saw it and could
>> weigh in. Especially since apart from you he's really the only other 
>> person that needs to change
>> anything to adopt this workflow.
>>
>>
>>     To me there is no difference between the two processes, except 
>> the "we've always done it this
>>     way syndrome". Fixes are generated from release tags into a 
>> hotfix branch. Once the fix is
>>     released, we merge it back into master, remove the branch and 
>> move on. I am preparing both
>>     releases and hotpicks so I don't see any extra work being 
>> generated for the devs.
>>
>>     The only chance I see on your parts is the need to change the 
>> tester scripts to point search for
>>     and test "hotfix" and "release" branches if they exist. I'm not 
>> the person doing that so I might
>>     have an overly simplified view of your processes but I really 
>> don't see the big deal.
>>
>>
>> If Brad Roberts decides it's too hard for whatever reason we should 
>> be able to just change the
>> workflow over to use a versioned branch name and dropping the step 
>> where the branch is deleted. Then
>> the hotfix process would just checkout the versioned branch (and skip 
>> the delete as well). I like
>> the tag and delete method better but we can't sacrifice the 
>> autotester for that.
>
> The problem is that as specified, _every_ fix requires also setting up 
> builds in the auto-tester (regardless of who does it). That should be 
> once per maintained version.  Deleting and recreating is a waste of 
> everyone's time.
>
> It's not just me that's affected.  Anyone who wants to test releases 
> as they're being built has to carefully track what branch to use when, 
> which is tedious and a waste of time.
>
> Also, what if we decide to patch two past releases, does that happen 
> serially, using the release branch name for each of the versions one 
> at a time?  Also stupid and a waste of time.
>
> Should I continue or is it obvious now?
>
> _______________________________________________
> dmd-beta mailing list
> dmd-beta at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-beta

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/dmd-beta/attachments/20140124/ff57d30b/attachment-0001.html>