Re: [boost] [1.50.0] RELEASE BRANCH REOPENED (was: Beta schedule)

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.50.0] RELEASE BRANCH REOPENED (was: Beta schedule)
From: lcaminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-23 09:45:34

Beman Dawes wrote
> 
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 7:55 AM, lcaminiti <lorcaminiti@> wrote:
>>
>> Daniel James-3 wrote
>>>
>>> On 22 May 2012 23:46, Eric Niebler <eric@> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Look for an email from us shortly. I'm taking it upon myself to reopen
>>>> the release branch for BUG FIXES ONLY (no new libraries). Please get
>>>> your changes in as soon as is convenient and prudent. It should be open
>>>> for at least a week. Then we'll require release manager approval.
>>>> Please
>>>> be sure trunk tests are clean before merging anything, as usual.
>>>
>>> I added a 'release branch closed' event to the calendar for next
>>> Monday, which is a little less than a week, but we normally do these
>>> things on Mondays. This is in no way final (I just picked a date), and
>>> might be changed later.
>>>
>>
>> To confirm, does this mean that release is open for merging, including
>> new
>> features, until next Monday?
> 
> "BUG FIXES ONLY" does not include new features.
> 
> You can ask for permission to merge a new feature. If it has been
> stable in trunk for awhile and is otherwise low risk, then we may OK a
> merge. But we are playing catch up for a release that was supposed to
> be done at the beginning of the month, so are trying to avoid anything
> that will result in further delays.
> 

Do I have permission to merge ScopeExit (improved), LocalFunction (new),
Funcitonal/OverloadedFunction (new), and Utility/IdentityType (new)? If so,
I can do that within today.

I'm answering your questions below from another email to assess the risk.

> It is an issue of risk. How long have these changes/refactorings been
> stable in trunk?
1+ month.

> How extensive were the changes?
ScopeExit ("small" library) 20% new but all old regressions plus all new
regressions pass.
LocalFunction ("small/mid-size" library), OverloadedFunction ("small"
library), and IdentityType ("tiny" library) 100% new.

> Were the changes fragile or once they worked on your development platform,
> did they pass all tests on other platforms?
Regressions passed on all compilers with little efforts after they passed on
MSVC and GCC on my development platform. Sun, and a little bit VACPP plus
PGI, were the only compilers that required some amount of extra work. All of
this was done 1+ month ago in trunk. That applies to all ScopeExit,
LocalFunction, OverloadedFunciton, and IdentityType.

> Have you done a local merge to release, and tested the results? 
Yes. I tested on MSVC 8.0, GCC 4.5.3 without and without C++11 feature
(that's my development platform). The tests pass on my development platform
for release as they do for trunk.

Please advice.

Thank you very much.
--Lorenzo

--
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/1-50-0-Beta-schedule-tp4630328p4630417.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.