From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-17 11:48:09
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> A draft proposal is available at
>> I've put a fair amount of thought into this proposal, and have run some
>> Subversion simulations to make sure it works smoothly.
>> What do others think?
> Mostly great. I'm concerned about these time slots. They don't seem
> necessary in principle since subversion has atomic commits, and they
> seem like they could introduce spurious lock contention on the
Point taken, although I'm not sure how serious a problem it is.
If it is a real problem, maybe something link this:
Step one: developers during the week merge into a "next" branch of
Step two: once a cycle (tentatively weekly), a single merge of the "next"
branch into stable head is done.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk