Re: [boost] Purchasing Travis Resources for boostorg (was Re: [1.65.0] Point release?)

Subject: Re: [boost] Purchasing Travis Resources for boostorg (was Re: [1.65.0] Point release?)
From: Gary Furnish (gfurnish_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-27 16:28:18

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Daniel James via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 27 August 2017 at 16:20, Vinnie Falco via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 7:12 AM, Daniel James via Boost
>> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Pull requests are tested on boostorg.
>>
>> 1. Authors can do pull requests against develop and master in their own forks
>
> Here's a pull request I created:
>
> https://github.com/boostorg/beast/pull/709
>
> I created it from a fork. Click on the little green tick:
>
> https://travis-ci.org/boostorg/beast/builds/259865444?utm_source=github_status&utm_medium=notification
>
> It was tested on boostorg.
>
> We need a central place for people to create pull requests - they
> can't be expected to track down the correct account for individual
> repos.
>
>> 2. If no one worked in topical branches directly in boostorg repos,
>> there would be much more CI bandwidth available for third party pull
>> requests made against boostorg repos
>
> Most developers want to integrate their changes into develop
> regularly. That way their changes get shared amongst other developers,
> and enter into the testing system, so problems on more obscure
> platforms get found earlier, and problems that the changes cause other
> libraries can be detected. It also means more of the historical test
> results appear in the boostorg repo.
>
> For what it's worth, I do all of my development on branches in forks,
> but we also have to work with the boostorg organisation as a
> collaborative location. We already have enough problems tracking
> changes in different libraries, making it harder is a bad idea.

I don't think anyone was proposing not to have develop on boostorg, I
think they were proposing not having 5000 branches of new features
actively under development on boost.  Authors can make their local
tests/commits to develop/test a feature on their account and then push
that feature to the develop branch on boostorg.  Develop should be for
testing of features before they find their way into master anyway.  If
I am working on a new feature/bugfix I don't want to be working on
someones ultra-unstable personal branch.

>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost