Subject: Re: [boost] [1.46.0] Release schedule?
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-04 12:14:35
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> At Thu, 3 Feb 2011 15:51:04 +0000,
> Daniel James wrote:
>> On 3 February 2011 15:29, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> >> 2 weeks.
>> > My gut said a month is a minimum.
>> What do you think the period between closing for new
>> libraries/major/minor changes and the start of the beta should be? I
>> also wonder how well people feel the distinction between different
>> types of changes works.
> My gut talking again: a few days at most.
There used to be a bunch of manual steps in building a release, beta
or otherwise, and many were error prone or subject to difficult to
diagnose failures. So we built a long time into the schedule for
building releases. Now the steps all mostly automated via scripts, and
rarely have any problems. There needs to be say two days in there to
give tests a chance to cycle to make sure a late change didn't totally
screw up lots of libraries. If we had a way to lock release tests into
a particular revision, we wouldn't need any delay at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk