On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 15:32:06 -0700, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 7/15/2012 3:00 PM, Adam Wilson wrote:
Also, all the released versions of D are available for download. There
is no
need to constantly download the latest if that disrupts your projects.
And with the comming deprecation of D1, what then?
It'll still be there for download for those that want to use it.
I guess my point is that at that time we only have one operative branch
per your implication. Great, it's still there, but it's un
Going backwards is almost never the answer with D2, the bugs are almost
always
still there.
To me, 'stable' means unchanging, not 'has no bugs'.
So the problem is semantics then? Because I dredge up another word to
describe what we are asking for if that's all it takes. But I don't think
that anyone else is going to read "stable" as "unchanging". Software is by
definition changing, or it's dead. It appears to my parsing of your
sentence that you are asserting that stable == static. By that definition
of stable, Windows ME is "stable" and ... ehrm, not a soul in the tech
world would agree with that summation of WinME.
As I said earlier, no one else in FOSS or Commercial equates stable with
"has no bugs", it means no new features and no regressions. Not a single
solitary person I've talked too expects their software to be bug free.
THIS is what we mean when we say "stable":
http://www.modernperlbooks.com/mt/2009/06/what-does-stable-mean.html
It's also how pretty much everyone else will read "stable".
--
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
