From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-28 15:59:08
"Aaron W. LaFramboise" <aaronrabiddog51_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> I think they are willing to destabilize the main trunk at least
>> during stage 1.
> It's worth pointing out that actual breakage itself is never allowed.
> All patches must pass regression testing before they can be committed,
> even in Stage 1. Very rarely is a patch accepted which causes a
> regression or other failure. Also, it is never ever acceptable for a
> patch to be committed that breaks bootstrap or some other major
> functionality, as seems to happen occasionally with Boost, as this
> prevents actual work or testing from happening.
> The previous sorts of broken code are what branches are for.
> The destablization allowed in stage 1 is primarily code which passes the
> regression tests, but is so large or intrusive that there are almost
> certainly unknown significant bugs or unforeseen problems.
So what's in the regression tests? Do they test every single compiler
back-end? Do they have one of every target machine? It seems to me
that changes in the intermediate language or even some front-ends
might be very difficult to make if they have to keep every host/target
combination working. IIUC, people who maintain ports to various
targets are domain experts much like the maintainers of various
"higher-level" boost libraries.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk