Subject: Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re: [rfc] rcpp)
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-28 12:54:06
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
> Daniel James
> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2010 5:40 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re:
> On 28 February 2010 16:47, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > But nobody has yet responded to the vital question of whether there are
> > resources to support a parallel tree to trunk,
> > in addition to sandbox, for what we are calling 'candidate' libraries.
> I think I did a while ago. The sandbox used to be organised as a
> parallel tree to the main tree (in CVS). It ended up a complete mess.
> If someone's willing to actively maintain it, then that might be
> averted, but experience suggests that they won't.
> But using separate repositories is a much better organisation anyway,
> it means that your history doesn't get all messed up as it does in
Ok - but are there resources to provide those repositories? (disk space may be
cheap, but the backup and up/ download traffic costs?)
Or is each developer supposed to provide his own???
And what about testing? Is each developing group responsible for testing its
own stuff, against latest release (and/or trunk?),
or some 'test farm' as for trunk?
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk