On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 08:45:31 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
> The final release of DMD 2.065 is now available. [1] contains complete descriptions of all changes, enhancements and fixes for this release.
Nice job wrangling the new release schedule and shepherding your first release out the door, hopefully the first of many to come.  Hope it's not too much more work than you thought it'd be when I recommended that you talk to the core devs about taking on the position.

Also, kudos to all the contributors, nice to see an amd64 build for FreeBSD finally.

On 2014-02-24 21:29, Walter Bright wrote:
> Looks like we need to do something about this:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1ytfc5/d_2065_released_with_396_fixes_and_improvements/cfnmkih
>
>
> At a minimum, add it to the changelog. Or possibly remove that change.

I've been compiling Tango with the latest version for a couple of releases now. I found some issues for this release. Some were fixed. Some where code that should not have compiled previously. Then I hit the issue with opCmp and I failed to find a reduced test case.

Why should I need opCmp in a struct containing only two ints?

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 2014-02-24 21:29, Walter Bright wrote:
> Looks like we need to do something about this:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1ytfc5/d_2065_released_with_396_fixes_and_improvements/cfnmkih
>
>
> At a minimum, add it to the changelog. Or possibly remove that change.

Answering some of your comments here:

Q: If the project fails to compile or run, who is responsible for debugging it

A: Preferably we have some way to run a bunch of projects as part of the test suite. Developers sign up their projects if they want to participate. If a build fails the developer gets a notification. The developer is responsible for debugging. If a project has successfully passed the 10 latest releases but the 11th fails I think the DMD/Phobos developers could have a quick look to see if it's something obvious.

Q: Individual projects tend to stick with particular subsets of the language. They may be large code bases, but likely exercise relatively small parts of the language, and so their successful compilation is not very indicative of much.

A: That's not entirely true. I can tell you that DMD has broken DWT, one way or another, for, at least, the 10 latest releases.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:11:46 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I would suggest a proper interim fix is to only reject key types that define opEquals, but not opCmp. Then switch to using equals in druntime.

Sorry, I meant define opCmp but not opEquals. Some types can be compared for equality but are not ordered (AA's for example!)

-Steve

On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 20:24:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 2/24/2014 9:48 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>> On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 17:42:07 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>> First thing I noticed though, the Windows installer seemed to forget where
>>> my existing D installation is, and tried to install it somewhere else.
>>> I thought this got fixed months ago? Regression in the installer?
>>>
>>
>> Nope, not a regression. That never got implemented.
>
> Is there a bugzilla issue for this?

Nope.

On 2/25/2014 2:28 AM, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> Walter + Andrei did it, and it was completely intentional, and it was known that
> it would break code.
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3054

It was intended to only break code that was already broken (would fail at runtime). It appears that this turned out to not be entirely true.

On 2/25/2014 11:03 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
> On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 20:24:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 2/24/2014 9:48 AM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>>> On Monday, 24 February 2014 at 17:42:07 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>>> First thing I noticed though, the Windows installer seemed to forget where
>>>> my existing D installation is, and tried to install it somewhere else.
>>>> I thought this got fixed months ago? Regression in the installer?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, not a regression. That never got implemented.
>>
>> Is there a bugzilla issue for this?
>
> Nope.

Please make one - otherwise it'll get overlooked.

On 25 February 2014 17:30, Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-02-24 21:29, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> Looks like we need to do something about this:
>>
>>
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1ytfc5/d_2065_released_with_396_fixes_and_improvements/cfnmkih
>>
>>
>> At a minimum, add it to the changelog. Or possibly remove that change.
>
>
> Answering some of your comments here:
>
> Q: If the project fails to compile or run, who is responsible for debugging it
>
> A: Preferably we have some way to run a bunch of projects as part of the test suite. Developers sign up their projects if they want to participate. If a build fails the developer gets a notification. The developer is responsible for debugging. If a project has successfully passed the 10 latest releases but the 11th fails I think the DMD/Phobos developers could have a quick look to see if it's something obvious.
>
> Q: Individual projects tend to stick with particular subsets of the language. They may be large code bases, but likely exercise relatively small parts of the language, and so their successful compilation is not very indicative of much.
>
> A: That's not entirely true. I can tell you that DMD has broken DWT, one way or another, for, at least, the 10 latest releases.
>

+1

I've have old projects break for silly reasons.  A forward reference regression here, an ICE suddenly appeared there.  These things happen and never get caught during the beta phase because.  1) I'm not actively developing the project.  2) I have a compiled binary I use sometimes day in day out, and have no reason to recompile it.   :)

On 2/24/2014 12:29 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Looks like we need to do something about this:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1ytfc5/d_2065_released_with_396_fixes_and_improvements/cfnmkih
>
>
> At a minimum, add it to the changelog. Or possibly remove that change.

https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=12255

24-Feb-2014 12:45, Andrew Edwards пишет:
> The final release of DMD 2.065 is now available. [1] contains complete
> descriptions of all changes, enhancements and fixes for this release.
>
> Available binaries can be accessed at [2]. Since the website will lag
> slightly behind, links are provided below for convenience.

Awesome.

Thanks to everybody behind the release engineering.
I don't know how good or painful it gets for these involved but from the outside (as a core developer) I see remarkable progress in handling the process.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky