From: Christian Larsen (contact_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-26 12:57:25
Beman Dawes skrev:
> That's very similar to the process we used for years. The only real
> difference being that then we only tested on one branch at a time, so
> developers usually applied patches first to the release branch and then
> merged them back to trunk.
> Getting a release out was a nightmare because it took so long to
> stabilize the release branch; it took close to a year.
> In May, 2007, at BoostCon, four of the Boost moderators together with
> several other long-time Boost developers got together and at Jeff
> Garland's suggestion decided to base each release on the prior release
> rather than trunk. It took us awhile to get that process started, but
> now it seems to be functioning well, and is a day and night improvement
> over the old way of doing things.
> Thus it is going to be a tough sell to get us to give up a process that
> seems to be working and revert to a process that was universally viewed
> as badly flawed.
Fair enough. I didn't know the history of why things are the way they
are, so thank you for taking the time to explain it. This makes sense,
and you're the ones who are working with it, so of course you should
decide what suits you best. :)
I was just wondering why such process which seems to work perfectly well
for other projects is a nightmare in the case of Boost. But I guess the
sum of all the libraries make things so much more complicated that it is
nearly impossible to manage. Kudos to you all for actually getting
releases out the door, it's much appreciated.