Boost logo

Boost :

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-04 21:51:45

Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> This doesn't address neither testing against new version of your
> library by developers of other libraies

Sure it does - they can either test against the HEAD as they do now
or they update their local installation

> nor dealing with testing
> agains updates of component your library depends on.

This amounts to using the tests for one library as tests of the
dependent library. There are two problems with this. First
its very inefficient and arbitrary as the tests in my library aren't
presume that the rest of boost works so they aren't designed
to test the rest of boost. And if an error occurs then it has to
be determined which of the components, libraries, build
system, etc which are simultaneously changing is the cause
of the failure. This wastes huge amount of time.

That being said. If the rest of boost things that the serialization
library is a good way test the other libraries - fine with me. Its
not an issue for me at all.

>Formalization of
> independent versioning should allow us deal with it.

I think boost as a concept has to change from tightly
coupled group of "standard" libraries to a loosely
coupled group of "interoperable" libraries. At its core
I think this is the issue. Good news is that its not something
that we have to agree upon. Its happening now as it
must as boost get beyond the scale where it can be
digested as a whole.

Robert Ramey

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at