From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-29 11:04:30
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 10:30:24 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
>> Based on past experience, the chance that a late change to Boost.Test
>> will disrupt the release process is rather high, so I also request
>> that you make every effort to freeze as soon as possible. If new
>> features are not required in order to get this release out, maybe
>> they should be left on a branch for a month.
> Perhaps we should tag the repository now so that we can easily revert to a
> stable state. Then if something goes wrong we can just back out Boost.Test
> changes and stay on schedule. It's not as complicated as a branch, but it's
> just as effective.
Not quite. With the branch, new code doesn't suddenly arrive and mess
up test results for several days and cause various people to pull
their hair out and scramble around looking for ways to port the test
library code to untested platforms. With the tag we'd have to decide
whether to revert or not, etc., etc. Either the changes to the
library should be made soon, IMO, or left off the main trunk until the
release branch is made (and left off the release branch entirely).
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
-- 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