From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-01 15:53:19
"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> How do you make a release that's exactly like some other release
>> except for the addition of bug fixes, when other non-bug-fix
>> material has been checked into the HEAD?
> If the HEAD is always maintained in "releaseable" state you won't
> want to do such a thing. Of course you could branch from a previous
> version - but in practice I wouldn't expect one to want to.
It doesn't matter what you want if your customers demand it. And they
do. Even a releasable state sometimes contains changes that are not
> This idea presumes and depends upon the existence of an on-demand
> facility for testing on branches. This same facility could be used
> to test a "point release".
> However, a main motivation for this idea is the elimination of the
> need for "point release". If the "trunk" (HEAD in the current setup)
> is maintained in a releaseable state, any need for a "point release"
> would be addressed by just downloading the latest "releaseable"
No, it wouldn't. In many organizations, code stability is important.
It can be prohibitive to accept the next releasable state and make all
the local adjustments that go along with it.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk