Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] trunk vs release
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-21 12:39:57

Beman Dawes wrote:

> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Robert Ramey wrote:
>>> This discussion demonstrates what's wrong with the current testing of the
>>> trunk.
>>> Here is the way it should be done.
>>> For each library that is changed, the library version on the trunk should
>>> be tested against
>>> the release branch.
>> I fully agree. This requires boost to become modular, with dependencies
>> between libraries properly being tracked and cared for, such that such an
>> arrangement becomes possible. (There are many more advantages to a modular
>> boost, which I won't repeat here, as we have had such discussions multiple
>> times in the past, never getting anywhere.)
> There was a lot of discussion of modularization at BoostCon. Several
> of us have volunteered our libraries as guinea pigs once the
> mechanisms are in place.

FWIW, I expect Boost.Build mechanisms to be implemented shortly. However,
to be fully sensible, it will require change of layout of libraries in SVN --
otherwise we'll end up in a situation currently with CMake -- where there's
'modularize' command which changes directory layout to be different from
that in SVN -- which is not a good idea in general.

- Volodya

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at