On 7/9/13 6:36 PM, Rob T wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 22:34:18 UTC, Rob T wrote:
>
>>
>> Agreed, however we should also have a pre-release package for testing
>> that is clearly marked as a pre-release, it can go on a separate web
>> page to avoid any possibility of confusion.
>>
>> The current release is showing as both 2.63.0 and 2.63 but I thought
>> it was supposed to be 2.63.2 everywhere. This is very confusing.
>>
>> --rt
>
> Running latest release shows this ...
>
> DMD64 D Compiler v2.063
>
> It should show the full release number.
>
> --rt

This is what the latest release shows for me:

Andrews-MacBook-Pro:vapor andrewedwards$ dmd
DMD64 D Compiler v2.063.2
Copyright (c) 1999-2013 by Digital Mars written by Walter Bright
Documentation: http://dlang.org/

Are you actually using the latest release?

On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 22:46:36 UTC, Tyro[17] wrote:
> On 7/9/13 6:36 PM, Rob T wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 22:34:18 UTC, Rob T wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Agreed, however we should also have a pre-release package for testing
>>> that is clearly marked as a pre-release, it can go on a separate web
>>> page to avoid any possibility of confusion.
>>>
>>> The current release is showing as both 2.63.0 and 2.63 but I thought
>>> it was supposed to be 2.63.2 everywhere. This is very confusing.
>>>
>>> --rt
>>
>> Running latest release shows this ...
>>
>> DMD64 D Compiler v2.063
>>
>> It should show the full release number.
>>
>> --rt
>
> This is what the latest release shows for me:
>
> Andrews-MacBook-Pro:vapor andrewedwards$ dmd
> DMD64 D Compiler v2.063.2
> Copyright (c) 1999-2013 by Digital Mars written by Walter Bright
> Documentation: http://dlang.org/
>
> Are you actually using the latest release?

I did a full removal, and install of latest version as of today downloaded from here: http://dlang.org/download.html

dmd_2.063-0_amd64.deb

The version on download page is showing 2.063-0, and so does the deb file name, and also the installation process shows 2.063-0 was installed.

Running compiler shows

DMD64 D Compiler v2.063

Something has gone wrong somewhere.

--rt

On Tuesday, 9 July 2013 at 22:53:08 UTC, Rob T wrote:
>
> I did a full removal, and install of latest version as of today downloaded from here: http://dlang.org/download.html
>
> dmd_2.063-0_amd64.deb
>
> The version on download page is showing 2.063-0, and so does the deb file name, and also the installation process shows 2.063-0 was installed.
>
> Running compiler shows
>
> DMD64 D Compiler v2.063
>
> Something has gone wrong somewhere.
>
> --rt

The download page has the wrong link, it doesn't seem to have been updated for 2.063.2. Can just manually add a .2 at the end, such as http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2013/dmd.2.063.2.zip

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 06:15:08AM +0200, Kapps wrote: [...]
> The download page has the wrong link, it doesn't seem to have been updated for 2.063.2. Can just manually add a .2 at the end, such as http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2013/dmd.2.063.2.zip

This sounds pretty serious. Can somebody who has access please fix this ASAP? We don't want our users to think they're getting 2.063.2 but actually it's still 2.063.


T

-- 
They say that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many people. -- Eddie Izzard, Dressed to Kill

On Wednesday, 10 July 2013 at 04:15:12 UTC, Kapps wrote:
> The download page has the wrong link, it doesn't seem to have been updated for 2.063.2. Can just manually add a .2 at the end, such as http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2013/dmd.2.063.2.zip

Thanks, that worked.

Yup the download page needs to be fixed asap.

--rt

On 7/10/13 11:27 AM, Rob T wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 July 2013 at 04:15:12 UTC, Kapps wrote:
>> The download page has the wrong link, it doesn't seem to have been
>> updated for 2.063.2. Can just manually add a .2 at the end, such as
>> http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2013/dmd.2.063.2.zip
>
> Thanks, that worked.
>
> Yup the download page needs to be fixed asap.
>
> --rt

Fixed and synced: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/commit/a5ecc6be856fe203e619fe59f96cc5ad2c844c3a

Andrei

On Wed, 2013-07-10 at 00:34 +0200, Rob T wrote:
[…]
> Agreed, however we should also have a pre-release package for testing that is clearly marked as a pre-release, it can go on a separate web page to avoid any possibility of confusion.
[…]

Well most people use X.Y.Z-alpha-N for bleeding edge releases, X.Y.Z-beta-N for getting close to a release, X.Y.Z-RC-N for actual release candidates, the last of which becomes the release simply by relabelling to X.Y.Z without any other change.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Saturday, 13 July 2013 at 15:20:44 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> Well most people use X.Y.Z-alpha-N for bleeding edge releases,
> X.Y.Z-beta-N for getting close to a release, X.Y.Z-RC-N for actual
> release candidates, the last of which becomes the release simply by
> relabelling to X.Y.Z without any other change.

Hopefully one day we'll see something like that with D releases.

--rt