Re: [boost] Proposal for radically altered approach to releases

From: Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve (rwgk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-11 15:06:18

--- Simon Carter <simon.carter_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Beman Dawes <bdawes <at> acm.org> writes:
> >
> > http://mysite.verizon.net/beman/release_overview.html.

This proposal looks very good to me. I've not used boost releases for years. In
my experience boost developers are very motivated to fix incompatibilities if
they are discovered quickly. If things drag out the enthusiasm is significantly
reduced. Therefore I update and test locally at least once a week. It has been
working very well for us. The proposed mechanism seems similar. My experience
suggests a positive outcome. However, this will depend a lot on reasonably
quick availability of regression test results. I think running tests once a
week (on some platforms) is not enough.

> I don't mind how the release is managed so long as I can use some kind of
> numbering system to completely identify the version of boost I have. As a
> minimum the overall boost version number should be incremented everytime
> anything in the release branch changes.

SVN maintains a global revision number. Does anyone know a good way of making
this number available via a header file (e.g. boost/svn_revision_stable.hpp)?
I.e. each time any file in the stable branch changes the header file should
automatically be updated.

Cheers,
        Ralf

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com