Re: [boost] Respecting a projects toolchain decisions

Subject: Re: [boost] Respecting a projects toolchain decisions
From: Nelson, Erik - 2 (erik.l.nelson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-27 11:13:07

Behalf Of Dean Michael Berris wrote on Monday, December 27, 2010 10:58 AM

>On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 <erik.l.nelson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Dean Michael Berris wrote on Monday, December 27, 2010
>>>Boost.Pool is one, and the other was Boost.Iterators.
>>>With Boost.Pool, there's no maintainer around (that I know) who's 
>>>checking patches submitted to it and making sure the changes make it 
>>>into the releases.
>>>With Boost.Iterators, it took a while to get a patch for an additional 
>>>iterator implementation to get into trunk -- and I'm not even sure if 
>>>my patch has made it into the release yet.
>
>> It's not clear to me that these problems have anything to do with 
>> Subversion... regardless of which vcs is used, *someone* is going to 
>> be the designated maintainer/owner of the library, and if you can't 
>> get them to include your patches, your patches won't be in the Boost 
>> release, right?
>

>Right, but then as I mention in a different thread, the maintainer/owner
>of the library can be MIA, and then I can ask the release managers
>and/or someone else who can pull the changes into their repository
>and shepherd the changes in. People (or in this case,
>I) can keep innovating and then the changes can get into the
>release in a less centralized manner -- which is the whole point
>of a decentralized system.

It seems to me you could write almost the same thing using SVN-speak...

"if the owner is MIA, I can send the patch to the release manager who can apply the patch to SVN and shepherd the changes in.  That way I can keep innovating on my local working copy and the change can get into the release on its own schedule"

Anyway, it seemed to me that the issue with patches for Boost.Pool and Boost.Iterators wasn't any inability to supply the patches to the 'official' place... it was an inability to get the attention of those who had the power to get the patches into 'official' Boost.  Git won't change that.

Erik

----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message w/attachments (message) is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this message is prohibited. 
Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any investment products or other financial product or service, an official confirmation of any transaction, or an official statement of Sender. Subject to applicable law, Sender may intercept, monitor, review and retain e-communications (EC) traveling through its networks/systems and may produce any such EC to regulators, law enforcement, in litigation and as required by law. 
The laws of the country of each sender/recipient may impact the handling of EC, and EC may be archived, supervised and produced in countries other than the country in which you are located. This message cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses. 

References to "Sender" are references to any subsidiary of Bank of America Corporation. Securities and Insurance Products: * Are Not FDIC Insured * Are Not Bank Guaranteed * May Lose Value * Are Not a Bank Deposit * Are Not a Condition to Any Banking Service or Activity * Are Not Insured by Any Federal Government Agency. Attachments that are part of this EC may have additional important disclosures and disclaimers, which you should read. This message is subject to terms available at the following link: 
http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer. By messaging with Sender you consent to the foregoing.