Re: [boost] [1.36.0] Libraries with unmerged changes?

From: James Sharpe (james.sharpe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-12 03:51:23

- Original message -
[SNIP]What's the obsession over a DVCS?

I personally find that the workflow of a DVCS is better suited to
frequent merges and frequent commits.  Personally I find tools such as
gitk useful in visualizing the progress of the project, and I just in
general feel much more comfortable with merging with a DVCS tool than
with subversion.

I get the feeling that most people working on boost haven't actually
tried a DVCS, and I would encourage people to try it out if they
haven't already.

James

Sent from Google Mail for mobile

On 7/12/08, Daryle Walker <darylew_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Jul 11, 2008, at 12:57 PM, James Sharpe wrote:
>
>> 2008/7/11 David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>:
> [SNIP]
>>> I am frankly not sure why Beman is inspecting the differences; it
>>> was my
>>>>
>>> presumption that we could do development in trunk without worrying
>>> about
>>> it, because the release branch is explicitly separated.
>>
>> Indeed, I understand that he is making sure that developers have
>> merged
>> changes they intended to merge; as I know a number of them missed the
>> official merge cutoff date, but again learning from the kernel release
>> process, the equivalent 'merge window' caught out some developers
>> initially
>> but they were strict about it; I think that boost should take a
>> similar
>> stance since the developers learnt that they had to get their
>> changes in
>> during the window or wait for the next release, and once the
>> momentum of
>> releases picked up this was less of an issue. It also has helped with
>> maintaining stability; since developers will tend to concentrate on
>> working
>> towards a particular release; if you know your changes are going to
>> take
>> slightly longer to develop then you target the next release, and by
>> using
>> DVCS this is easily done and doesn't ever create any confusion as the
>> developer maintains his/her branch until its ready for integration
>> upon
>> which point a integration request is made and either further, wider
>> testing
>> occurs or it gets merged into the next release.
>
> What's the obsession over a DVCS?  Wouldn't any VCS that supports
> branching (and merging), like our current Subversion, be sufficient?
>
> --
> Daryle Walker
> Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
> darylew AT hotmail DOT com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>

-- 
Sent from Google Mail for mobile | mobile.google.com