Am Fri, 04 Jan 2013 15:55:01 +0100 schrieb "deadalnix" <deadal...@gmail.com>:
> On Thursday, 3 January 2013 at 18:58:51 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > > Turn that around - what's the benefit of keeping it? It's just > > clutter. > > > > It has been discussed here before, and many people agreed that > stagging can go away, as changes made in the proposal made it > quite redundant. That sounds the reasonable thing to do. I just thought about something - maybe staging isn't 100% redundant. I assume my conclusions on http://wiki.dlang.org/User:Jpf/Release_Process are correct: If we want release stabilization time == time between 2 releases i.e. we start a new release/version branch after every major release: Let's say 2.062 is in stabilization phase and we use the 2.062 branch. Then bugfixes are based on / merged into 2.062 branch. So someone opens a pull request targeting the 2.062 branch with a bugfix. For some reason (lack of time) this request isn't merged till 2.062 is released. After the release only regression fixes should go into 2.062. But we now have a bugfix (not regression) pull request targeting the 2.062 branch! Staging completely avoids that issue. So is this reason enough to have staging?