From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-17 06:57:52
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Thu Oct 04 2007, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
>> Until further notice, the plan is to do quarterly Boost releases, and
>> stick to that schedule even if updates for particular libraries aren't
>> If a library on the trunk isn't ready for a release, the prior release
>> will be used for that library.
>> I hoping for a final cut-off date of Friday, October 19, for making
>> "go/no-go" decisions on which library updates make it into 1.35.0.
> Well, I'm just going through re-entry from Kona, so that gives me very
> little time to do anything.
>> That means libraries with updates to be included should be passing
>> regression tests on trunk well before then. The process of merging
>> into the release branch will start sooner for libraries already
>> Here is what developers should be doing over the next two weeks:
>> * Start watching the regression tests at
> OK. My errors look like they are exclusively either:
> * Linker errors due to a mis-specified set of system libraries that
> needs to link with various Python components. That should be
> a relatively easy Boost.Build fix.
Is someone working on this fix?
> * Tester misconfiguration issues, as in
> * The import_ test failure. That's Stefan Seefeld's baby and I've
> asked him to look into it.
Please keep pestering him or markup the test as an expected failure
(unless you consider it a showstopper).
> Also, I had stopped maintaining trunk a long time ago, when I
> incorrectly understood that we were going to restart from 1.34.x for
> the next release, so I'm not 100% confident that my work on 1.34 has
> all been merged to the trunk for any of my libs. Not moving tests
> over could hide a feature removal, so I need to look at that for all
> my libs, not just Python.
>> * For release criteria compilers, fix or markup all failures
>> caused by your library's code. Fix or markup failures caused by
>> your library's code for other compilers according to your own
>> * For release criteria compilers show failures you think are
>> caused by some other library's code, or by test configuration
>> problems, post list notifications directed at the library or
>> tool causing the problem. For other compilers, do the same if
>> you wish.
>> * For testing on the trunk to be a reliable indicator of release
>> stability, prerequisite libraries on the trunk must be ready
>> for release. If the trunk for your library isn't going to be
>> ready in time for this release, please make a branch of the
>> trunk with your library's name, and "merge" the trunk for
>> your library so it is identical to 1.34.1.
> Well, I'll certainly need a few more days than "until friday" if
> Boost.Python is going to be ready for this release.
That Friday date will have to be deferred, although I'm still planning
to issue a progress report on Friday. With the tarball testers still
broken, we just aren't making the progress hoped for.
> Do you want me to
> replace the trunk with 1.34.1?
That's up to you. You can also simply ask that Boost.Python trunk not be
merged into the release, thus skipping all Boost.Python updates for 1.35.0.
> We seem to be testing some compilers
> for 1.35 that we weren't testing for 1.34.1, so I don't have any
> confidence that it will actually fix the failures we're seeing.
Testing continues to be a serious problem. Intellectually I knew that
because of Thomas Witt's experiences, but now that I'm the one having to
cope with it, our testing unreliability has really hit home.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk