On 1/3/13 3:17 PM, Rob T wrote:
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 at 19:19:49 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 1/3/13 1:58 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
As I suggested to Jacob, if the wiki lists git command sequences, it
should be complete (like a script), and not full of assumptions about
other commands that need to be inserted.
I think this is a pertinent point - the process proposed at github is
incomplete and scantily motivated. Can the experts make one more pass
through it?
Thanks,
Andrei
I'm rather concerned when I see comments that suggest that the purpose
of the staging branch was not understood in the slightest. There's a lot
of discussion on the issue here
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/ka5rv5$2k60$1...@digitalmars.com
The people who are attempting to use the new process have to at least
take some time to read through the process discussion threads, certainly
that is not ideal, and the wiki should explain everything much better.
That is correct. The discussion was the crucible and the wiki page
should be the result of what boiled down into it. There continues to be
a bit a debate on the exact details of the procedure to be followed,
which has naturally led to a scant wiki page.
That all is natural and expected - no need for it to cause concern.
The reason for a less than adequate process description, is that the
process was not yet fully completed and was difficult to complete
without a dry run to work out the bugs and oversights etc. Instead of a
dry run, we're experiencing the real thing, started in the middle of the
holidays to boot.
We have to expect some problems of course!
There we go :o).
It would be nice to contain everything under one discussion thread so
that the same people who started this whole thing are more likely to
notice the complaints and misunderstandings and so forth.
It's funny - that was my exact intent when I started the thread "Next
focus: PROCESS"!
Andrei
