Subject: Re: [boost] [Release Managers] Merging Parameter to Release
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-31 09:38:36
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> What are the nature of the recent changes? Bug fixes?
>> A bug fix and associated doc change.
>>> If so, I'm inclined to accept the bug fixes and reject the additional
>>> tests to avoid the appearance of a regression. Beman?
>> That's the possibility I was suggesting.
> Hmmm - wouldn't that just be hiding a bug?
> Are we doing anyone any favor by hiding a test known to fail?
> I think you should just leave the new tests in even though they
> are failing. Perhaps an addition in the release notes to indicate
> a pending issue would be in order.
> I presume that the newer version is strictly better than the
> previous one so there's no question that it should be released.
> I would say,
> a) Release the library with the failing test
> b) Note the recently detected bug in the release notes
> c) Address the bug separately.
> Note that this wouldn't break precedent in anyway since
> all libraries have test failures on at least some platforms.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk