From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-18 01:59:18
David Abrahams wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> Probably, but I don't know how to attack some of the tool problems
>> otherwise. For example, the problem of people changing the tool chain
>> without realizing it has an impact on the automated release tools, and
>> the problem of the automated release tools no longer producing some
>> component (like docs) because of a tool change, and no one noticing.
> on Sun Aug 17 2008, "Robert Ramey" <ramey-AT-rrsd.com> wrote:
>> My real point is that there is no reason that any tools that
>> are used by boost should be treated any differently than
>> any libraries used by boost.
> Does that assertion have any practical implications for the issue
> being discussed?
LOL - of course it does. If regression testing were setup for
boost tools, they would be demonstrated to be functioning as
expected before they were used in the actual release process.
Had this been procedure been in place, the issue raised
above would not have occurred.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk