On 9 July 2015 at 21:09, Martin Nowak via dmd-internals <dmd-internals@puremagic.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2015 03:45 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> Recently got on-board with Semaphore-CI (better platform than
> Travis-CI IMO)

Well adding D to the list of supported PLs always helps our visibility,
but then again there is way more important stuff to do than adding a
Travis-CI alternative.
It's also an endless job to add support for all CI systems.
http://www.slant.co/topics/186/compare/~circleci_vs_shippable_vs_travis

> currently investigating using their docker-beta platform to push out
binary tarballs

For release building? Are you cross-compiling? That would be interesting
for dmd as well. VirtualBox doesn't make things faster, but
cross-compiling comes with it's own drawbacks.



Building cross-compilers is the end goal, yes.

 
> Download paths needs an overhaul.  In retrospect I think it's
> not a good idea to update D frontend versions in GCC release
> branches.

Not sure. In the long-run you want to move gdc into the gcc repo, so
gcc's version numbers should be dominant.
I think 4.9.2+2.068.0 perfectly makes sense.
How does gccgo handle this?

 
Whatever is the current version of Go when GCC release freezes is the version that will be shipped with it.

If I imposed this more strictly, we would instead have:

4.8.4+2.064.2
4.9.2+2.065.0
5.1.0+2.066.1
6.0.0+2.067-dev

Yes, DMD releases take so long, they are pretty much in sync with GCC. (Although, still one release behind DMD by the time I manage to complete the merge ;-)

Iain