Re: [boost] [boost-steering] Re: [Git] Documentation for Git and Modular Boost conversion

Subject: Re: [boost] [boost-steering] Re: [Git] Documentation for Git and Modular Boost conversion
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-07 16:48:44

on Fri Dec 07 2012, Eric Niebler <eric-AT-boostpro.com> wrote:

> (cc'ing boost-steering ...)
>
> On 12/7/2012 12:09 PM, Michael Fawcett wrote:
>
>> I've since moved on to another company, but at my last job at least
>> three projects I worked on had a similar setup.  They wouldn't be
>> affected though since the externals were set up to the /releases/
>> directory and grabbed a certain tag (e.g. boost 1.41.0).  I think this
>> is probably the most common externals scenario.
>> 
>> It seems the only people immediately affected would be those with
>> svn:externals to boost/trunk, which seems like an unlikely scenario.
>
> That seems unlikely to me also. Rene?

Me too, and I don't think we shoudl try to provide a seamless transition
for every possible use case.

>> Those with existing externals wishing to upgrade to the latest boost
>> release would need that migration path, however.

Those people would either stop using SVN externals for Boost, and simply
check a copy of Boost into their source tree, or maintain their own SVN
mirror of the boost releases (at least the ones they're interested in)
and then point their externals to that mirror.

> This could be accommodated easily, I think, but it's something we'd have
> to add. There will be a script used by the release managers to
> reassemble a monolithic boost from the modules for a release. All that
> would be needed would be to run that script nightly and push the results
> into a separate git repo for people to track. 

I think that's a bad idea, because it would leave us responsible for
maintaining a correspondence between said git repo and our other reality
that meets peoples' expectations.  Furthermore, I don't see how
providing a Git repo is going to be much help to people that are using
SVN externals.

Boost is making this transition.  It *will* cause some disruption.  It
will also make things easier for some people.  IMO we should not burden
this move, which is supposed to make it easier and more efficient
overall for Boost to operate, with any unnecessary obligations.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing                  Software Development        Training
http://www.boostpro.com             Clang/LLVM/EDG Compilers  C++  Boost