On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 09:29:22 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
On Thursday, 23 May 2013 at 09:26:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/23/2013 2:01 AM, Dicebot wrote:
See current beta mailing list for several
examples of what should have never happened in real stable
development process.
The reason it is a beta is so we can identify problems and
deal with them before a release.
In perfect world beta exists to identify problems _unknown_
before. Almost all issues I have seen mentioned so far was
known by developers (those were bug fixes after all) but
considered acceptable to put into compiler anyway. And that is
a problem.
I don't think it's possible for a language to both evolve and
keep being stable. At least not with the current release process,
with a single branch.
There should at least be 2 branches - stable (as in binary stable
- 0% code breakage), and experimental/beta/you name it, which
breaks code when reasonable.
Then, after some amount of time, this experimental branch becomes
the new stable branch (while the previous is still available for
download).
I think the "Development and Release Process" wiki page proposes
exactly that.
http://wiki.dlang.org/Release_Process
