Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-22 21:31:27

Robert Ramey wrote:
> Basically I think this is a big step in the right direction.
> I do think that one thing should be considered.
> The release manager has the responsability of generating a quality release.
> I think its only fair that he have the corresponding authority to restrict
> check-ins to the release to those packages that HE deems ready
> for release. That is, check-ins to the the ready-for-release branch
> would be subject to his prior approval. Or may he himself is the
> only authority - he would have a lock on the release branch. He
> might want to use this authority in a number of ways.
> a) he might be in the middle of making a release tarball and
> finishing up a couple of pending issues and not want anyone
> messing with the release while he does this.
> b) He might want to control that code is checked in to the
> the release one library at a time. This would be especially
> useful for pre-requiste libraries which might generate failures
> ni other libraries. By choosing to hold other check-ins in the
> meantime, he can be sure that any failures are due to interface
> breaking without having to start up a research project. Note
> that tool updates like bjam etc are in the same situation
> as pre-requisit libraries in that all libraries depend upon them.
> But my main point is still the first one. Its unfair and unrealistic
> to expect the release manager to create a good release unless
> he has the leverage and authority required to do that.

I agree with you 100%. Basically, everything under
is the domain of the release manager. I'll update the trac doc
accordingly (but probably not until tomorrow) to reflect that.



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