On Tuesday, 9 September 2014 at 12:31:26 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
Also it sounds as if you think that someone actually does any
coordination about what must go into release. As far as I am
aware there is no such thing, even http://wiki.dlang.org/Agenda
is just a convention. Currently releases are based exclusively
on a time frame + regression list (all that was in master goes
to the release branch and is kept there until known regressions
are fixed, repeat for the next cycle).
Are you satisfied with the current process?
Let me summarize some important drawbacks of the current workflow:
1. No clear defined deadline for preparing a merge-able PR.
2. Unorganized PR merge campaigns. The people merging the PR are
doing a great job, but they do this triggered by arbitrary
events: too many open PRs, a cool new PR appears, somebody poke
them on forum, or simply have some time for this kind of work.
3. Somehow arbitrary merge criteria. Having a defined merge
window, when some people do just PR merges, will implicitly
produce more predictable and uniform acceptance criteria.
4. Lack of focus during test phase. Maybe this is the main reason
for the v2.066 regressions. Some people keep merging new PRs,
before the old ones are proven done during the test phase. Even
Walter was annoyed a couple of times by the multitude of versions
that the people are simultaneously working on.
5. Rotting old PRs. The "merge window" phase would be a defined
recurrent occasion to review and decide about those.
