Re: [boost] [1.51, heap] permission to merge r80039

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.51, heap] permission to merge r80039
From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-08-15 18:40:51

On 8/15/2012 3:28 PM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
>>>> request for release manager:
>>>>
>>>> i'd like to merge r80039 to release, as it fixes bug #7233. ok or too late?
>>>
>>> The release branch is still open for bug (and doc) fixes. 
>>> Today is the last day, though.
>>
>> Marshall, this change was made on trunk 9 hours ago. That's not nearly
>> enough time for tests to cycle.
>>
>> I'm not overruling you. Your decision stands. But in the future, we (the
>> release managers) really need to stick to the script. Changes must be
>> tested on trunk before they can be merged to release.
>>
>> And a similar heads-up to all boost developers: code changes this late
>> in the game will not make the cut if they aren't tested.
> 
> this specific bug has been reported this morning and the fix is rather
> trivial. not merging the fix means that there is a known bug in the
> release, which is unfortunate as well. would be less of a problem, if
> we'd have regular (monthly?) bugfix releases, but that won't work well
> with the current two-branch branching model.

I don't have a fundamental issue with shipping a release with known
bugs. In fact, I don't think boost has ever gone out the door without
heaps (no pun intended) of known bugs -- just check trac. Taking a fix
is taking a risk. You could break something more fundamental, maybe on a
platform you don't have access to, or maybe in a downstream library you
didn't test locally. Some bugs are serious enough to justify the risk
this late in the cycle. Most are not. That's why we have our release
policies in place. IMO, it's not too onerous to require that testers
have had a chance to cycle on changes in trunk before they get merged to
release. It's a low bar. If somebody wants the release managers to make
an exception for a particularly serious bug, they can make their case.
We're reasonable people, and we *do* have the quality of the release in
mind. Promise. :-)

I agree, point releases would be nice. That's a different discussion.

Thanks for your understanding,

-- 
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com