Re: [boost] One small step for mankind - was Re: What's happened to Ryppl?

Subject: Re: [boost] One small step for mankind - was Re: What's happened to Ryppl?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-30 07:09:49

At Sat, 29 Jan 2011 15:35:10 -0800,
Robert Ramey wrote:
> 
> Dave Abrahams wrote:
> > Robert, great questions.  Could you post them to the boost developers'
> > list?  They really don't belong here.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> Dave Abrahams wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>
> >> In the interest of moving toward a better modularization of boost
> >> and decoupling of libraries, I would like to make a suggestion:
> >>
> >> Can we change library testing so that each library is tested against
> >> the current release branch of all the other libraries?
> >>
> >> When I test on my own machine, I don't test against the trunk. 

Oh... the release *branch* rather than the *released version*.
Interesting.

+1.  However, we should be prepared: that could make for a lot of
churn on test machines.

I think Boost's testing focus should be on 1) release candidates
(i.e. what's in the release branch today) and secondarily on 2)
libraries in-development as tested against the release candidates of
everything else.  I don't think there's any reason to show all
developers the complete results of #2 unless they want to go out of
their way to see them; the only #2 results I care about are those
testing my libraries.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com