On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:51:52AM +0100, bearophile wrote: > eskimo: > > >Even the unstable branch should stop adding new features let's say at > >least three months before the next stable release, so all things in > >stable have been tested at least a certain minimum amount of time in > >unstable. (People can still work on new features, but only in > >separate feature branches, which will not be part of the next stable > >release.) > > Maybe there are alternative ways to do this. > > But generally I agree with your post and I suggest to make a little > DEP out of it, or to copy your post somewhere in the Wiki, to make it > the starting point (to be improved, where necessary) document for the > future D development process. [...]
I think ultimately, as Walter has said, nothing is going to change unless somebody steps up to the plate and champions the effort to make a stable branch. Writing up proposals, specs, and other docs are good in theory, but won't accomplish a thing if nobody actually *does* anything about it. I think 1100110 has stepped up to make a stable branch; let's work with him to make it actually happen. T -- "I'm running Windows '98." "Yes." "My computer isn't working now." "Yes, you already said that." -- User-Friendly