Subject: Re: [boost] [git] neglected aspects
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-02-10 11:09:01
Daniel James wrote:
> On 10 February 2012 15:01, Julian Gonggrijp <j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Note (1): my depiction of the current Boost workflow might be
>> inaccurate. If you see a way to improve the image, please go ahead or
>> let me know what needs to be changed.
> You've actually over-estimated our process. We never do a complete
> merge from trunk to release, just either cherry-pick changes, or do a
> sub-tree merge. There are often long neglected changes in trunk -
> which is a major problem with the current system.
Good to hear that at least I didn't under-estimate it. :-)
I guess the difference between a merge with manual exceptions and
cherry picking is only gradual, but I strongly agree neither is ideal.
>> Note (3): while this image helps to explain my point in , it turns
>> out from  that I didn't actually address Daniel James' point. I'll
>> return to the testing issue in a new reply to .
> Having thought about it a bit, it might be the case that I exaggerated
> the issue. It certainly matters to me, but I'm not sure about other
> developers. A lot of the newer libraries don't put much effort into
> supporting the more obscure compilers.
Perhaps, but I think there is also another reason why the testing
issue is not as severe as it may seem. I'll post about it tomorrow.