Re: [boost] [1.40.0] OK to build release?

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.40.0] OK to build release?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-07 16:21:54

Eric Niebler wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>
>>> There has been little feedback on the 1.40.0 beta release. I'm
>>> hoping that is a good sign:-)
>>
>> Or users just don't do anything until it's really-really-final
>> tarball :-( We've just got a bug report on boost-users:
>>
>>         http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.user/47346
>>
>> that say that install, on Linux, does not work, unless you specify
>> --libdir option explicitly. 'stage' is not affected.
>>
>> I am very sorry for letting this slip, but the question is what to
>> do now. I've already fixed the problem on trunk:
>>
>>         https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/52754
>>
>> How do we make this available to users?
>>
>> 1. Is release branch open now for all commits?
>
> Beman?
>
>> 2. It is desirable to create new set of packages, with fixed
>> version of bootstrap.sh? Alternatively, should it be in some
>> 'hot-fix' area?
>
> IMO, this issue is serious enough to justify a point release. Here's
> what I'd like to see:
>
> - We create a 1.39.1 branch from the 1.39 tag.
> - We merge the patched bootstrap.sh to the 1.39.1 branch
> - We issue a new release from that branch
>
> Also,

*** here is one man's opinion.

I'm concerned that this would take up a lot of time on the
release manager's part.  I propose something simpler.

create a tag on 1.39.0 - if it's not created already.

Check in this "critical" change. (I'm assuming there is some
sort of consensus that is a showstopper for people).

create a tag on the release branch called 1.39.1

at this point, the issuse of if/when/how to distribute a
"point release" can be separate to any other issues.

It would also be nice of something could be added
to the build test suite that would have detected this earlier.

Robert Ramey

As

>
> - We open the normal release branch for general merges and start work
> on 1.40.
>
> Opinions?