I'm working on my presentation for the conference and I'm running out of time.  I'd like to ask you guys for some help locating a few dates:

1) When 0.x transitioned from alpha to beta
2) Was there a beta to release candidate transition for 0.x -> 1.x? If so, when?  I have the 1.00 release date, that one is easy.
3) When did the 2.x series switch similarly (alpha, beta, rc)?
4) When were the various platforms added to the release bundles?


Any other events you consider major in the history of D.  I've already got a bunch, but have room to include more and would hate to miss anything big.  We each have our own view on what's important and I won't promise to include ones mentioned, but I'd love to have more to consider including.

Please send them directly to me (braddr@puremagic.com) rather than follow up in the news group to avoid a long and not really appropriate for the announce group discussion.

Thanks,
Brad

On 20/05/14 10:19, Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> I'm working on my presentation for the conference and I'm running out of
> time.  I'd like to ask you guys for some help locating a few dates:
>
> 1) When 0.x transitioned from alpha to beta
> 2) Was there a beta to release candidate transition for 0.x -> 1.x? If
> so, when?  I have the 1.00 release date, that one is easy.
> 3) When did the 2.x series switch similarly (alpha, beta, rc)?
> 4) When were the various platforms added to the release bundles?

Here is what I found out from the changelog:

* Linux 0.63 [1]
* OS X 32bit 1.040 [2], 2.025 [8]
* FreeBSD 2.053 [3], 1.043 [4]
* OS X 64bit 2.053 [3], 1.072 [5]
* Linux 64bit 2.052 [6], 1.067 [7]

[1] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog1.html#new063
[2] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html#new1_040
[3] http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_053
[4] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html#new1_043
[5] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html#new1_072
[6] http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_052
[7] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/changelog.html#new1_067
[8] http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_025

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 5/20/2014 4:19 AM, Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> I'm working on my presentation for the conference and I'm running out of
> time.  I'd like to ask you guys for some help locating a few dates:
>
> 1) When 0.x transitioned from alpha to beta
> 2) Was there a beta to release candidate transition for 0.x -> 1.x? If
> so, when?  I have the 1.00 release date, that one is easy.
> 3) When did the 2.x series switch similarly (alpha, beta, rc)?

There weren't really any alpha/beta/rc states for any of that. Neither formally nor informally. Back then, everything was all just "if it's good enough for you, then go ahead and use it". The stability was more of an ever-progressing (and occasionally regressing) gradient.

Also, 0.x -> 1.x was only an arbitrary "line in the sand". Version 1.000 was just simply the name of the next regular release after 0.1xx (whatever the "xx" would have been, don't recall offhand). The 1.000 moniker was more PR than technical.

Similarly, version 2.000 was just simply the next "mainline" release after it was decided to fork off a separate "no more breaking changes" branch (which is what 1.x *became* when 2.000 was released).

It was all definitely very much *not* "semantic versioning".

On 20/05/14 20:56, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

> There weren't really any alpha/beta/rc states for any of that. Neither
> formally nor informally. Back then, everything was all just "if it's
> good enough for you, then go ahead and use it". The stability was more
> of an ever-progressing (and occasionally regressing) gradient.
>
> Also, 0.x -> 1.x was only an arbitrary "line in the sand". Version 1.000
> was just simply the name of the next regular release after 0.1xx
> (whatever the "xx" would have been, don't recall offhand). The 1.000
> moniker was more PR than technical.
>
> Similarly, version 2.000 was just simply the next "mainline" release
> after it was decided to fork off a separate "no more breaking changes"
> branch (which is what 1.x *became* when 2.000 was released).
>
> It was all definitely very much *not* "semantic versioning".

Yeah, and it still continues with the same model. Although, we have had a few alphas and betas of individual releases.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg