Re: [boost] Updated Development and Release Practices for 1.35.0

From: Michael Marcin (mmarcin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-27 20:18:55

Johan Nilsson wrote:
> 
> As I understood it, there will be a single "relase candidate" _branch_, used 
> for the "ever-available stable build". The individual release candidates 
> would still need to be separately tagged for "official" release candidates.
> 
> Imagine that someone declares the "official" release candidate for Boost 
> 1.x.y being available under "branches/release". Now, a number of users 
> download that candidate, testing it. The next day other users download from 
> the same location, testing it. During that period of time something happened 
> to the release candidate (e.g. one library was fixed). When the users report 
> and discuss possible problems and errors with the release candidate, how can 
> they easily know _which_ release candidate (i.e. the code state) that they 
> are talking about without also having the candidates tagged - e.g. how can 
> someone be able to answer the following questions: Did you notice the 
> problem in RC_x_y_1 already? Is it fixed in RC_x_y_2?
> 
> If I'm completely wrong, I'd be grateful for someone correcting me.
> 

Subversion revision numbers are global and atomic. They can simply refer 
to the revision they have.

I think of tags as simply a convenient alias for a folder at a revision 
under Subversion.

- Michael Marcin