Re: [boost] 1.35 release approach (was [1.34.0] Deadline)

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-02 06:34:31

on Tue May 01 2007, "Peter Dimov" <pdimov-AT-mmltd.net> wrote:

> Jeff Garland wrote:
>
>> The bottleneck I see is the regression testers. Right now Thomas
>> needs them to keep running against 1.34 for final patches he's adding
>> in. Going forward, I believe we will need significant time and energy
>> from the regression runners as we test the subversion switchover.
>> What I'd like to see happen is that instead of going back to main
>> branch after Thomas is done we swap the regression testers over to
>> the 1.35 branch immediately.  The folks testing main can be the first
>> beta-testers for subversion switchover.
>
> The problem with this scheme - from a library developer point of view - is 
> that one cannot experiment with new features since nobody is testing HEAD. 
> One possible outcome is then for 1.35 to become a de-facto HEAD and absorb 
> most of the new development. 

Actually, the plan -- at least the plan Doug suggested and I agreed
to -- was to make 1.34 the de-facto head, so we have something
regression-free to start with.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com
Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com