From: Michael Marcin (mmarcin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-03 13:07:56
Peter Dimov wrote:
> Martin Wille wrote:
>> Peter Dimov wrote:
>>> Another interesting example is adding a new test that exposes an
>>> existing bug. This test has never passed, but its inclusion is
>>> prevented by the stability requirement.
>> No, in this scenario, the bug has been there before. There's no break
>> of stability if the bug gets indicated by the testing harness from
>> some point in time on.
> There is no break in stability, but there is a violation of the stability
> requirements, which demand that there should be no test failures on the
> stable branch. This prevents the merge of the new test unless the same merge
> also contains a fix.
So if library A highlights a bug in library B than the author of library
A must go and fix the bug in library B and add covering tests even
though he isn't the maintainer? This seems like a recipe for subtle bugs
and peoples toes getting stepped on.
Perhaps I misunderstood.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk