Re: [boost] [git help] Documenting common modular boost workflows

Subject: Re: [boost] [git help] Documenting common modular boost workflows
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-22 22:51:21

on Mon Oct 21 2013, Daryle Walker <darylew-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:

> Since a project that’s made of a bunch of sub-repositories that’s
> later merged is (AFAIK) unusual, I don’t think the writer of gitflow
> had it in mind.
>
> I’m guessing that each sub-repository independently uses gitflow.
> When it’s shipping time, the release-merge script grabs from the
> “master” branch of each sub-repository.  Of course, this doesn’t cover
> multiple libraries that have to work together or what happens when
> fixing is necessary (probably due to cross-library problems).
>
> And do the test runners work off “develop,” “master,” “release,” or
> does it shift depending where we are in the release cycle?

Ideally, we'd test everything, in this priority order:

master
release/v<version>
develop

> Sent from Windows Mail
>
> From: Peter Dimov
> Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎October‎ ‎21‎, ‎2013 ‎10‎:‎16‎ ‎AM
> To: Boost Dev-List
>
> Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> IIUC we already agreed long ago to use gitflow:
>
> It's not entirely clear to me what using gitflow would mean in the context 
> of a Boost superproject with per-library submodules. Who is "we" who would 
> be using gitflow, the Boost release managers or the library
> maintainers? 

Both

> When Boost release 1.64.0 is started, who is going to create the gitflow 
> release branch, 

A Boost release manager

> and from what?

>From the "master" branch of the top-level Boost repository

-- 
Dave Abrahams