From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-21 19:57:28
Michael Fawcett wrote:
>> This isn't a big deal in practice since the author of A will simply
>> ask the author of B to merge first.
> Isn't it also possible that in the interim, B+dB now also depends on
> A+dA? i.e. neither can merge without breaking the other - they must
> both be merged at once, or merged in steps to prevent breakage.
They way to prevent breakage or detect it in a timely matter is
a) to test each library against the "release ready" branch
b) to merge tested libraries into the "release ready" branch one
at a time.
c) test the "release ready" after EACH merge. If there
is a test failure there is a bug in one of the libraries.
Release Ready branch is broken
e) Developers arm wrestle to determine who fixes what.
and get it done ASAP. Changes are retested on the
trunk and merged again - or maybe the latest merge
is backed out.
Release Ready branch is now "release ready" again.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk