Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Documentation for Git and Modular Boost conversion
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-08 20:43:18
Beman Dawes wrote:
> We are starting to pull together documentation for the Git and Modular
> Boost conversion.
> Comments and corrections welcome!
> I'm particularly interested in unanswered questions you have after
> reading these initial docs.
I'm very excited to see this plan take form. My compliments to the
people who are making this happen.
Browsing through the wiki pages linked from that section, a few things
caught my attention.
wiki/ModCvtSvn2Git  states
> Each individual Boost library's public repository will contain a
> single branch, "master", that corresponds to branches/release in
As I seemed to recall that the modularized Boost would adopt GitFlow,
I was surprised by the suggestion that a library's public repository
would not be allowed (or at least not required) to have a "develop"
branch corresponding to the Subversion "trunk". Indeed when I opened
wiki/StartModWorkflow  it turned out that the wiki pages don't
internally agree on this issue yet:
> An unusually simple, single developer library would have only the
> permanent *develop* and *master* branches that are required for all
> Boost libraries.
Furthermore the bullet list at the top of  seems to suggest that
the new Git repositories will not keep track of any history; only the
list item dedicated to the old Svn repo mentions "full history". I
believe this to be partly due to an inaccuracy, because the individual
library repos will contain /branches/ which supposedly will hold all
commits made to those brances. This is also further explained in .
Another reason might be (IIUC) that after the initial conversion, the
individual library repos will start with only a clean copy of the
latest state on the Svn repo. Nonetheless I believe the current
wording on the wiki page can be needlessly alarming to the less
gitflow-enlightened reader, because it may seem to suggest that it
still won't record history /after/ the initial conversion.
While wiki/ModCvtSchedule  may be alpha, the schedule seems
ambitious enough that I think it would be wise to get all library
maintainers ready for take-off as soon as possible. Even if you don't
really plan to have library maintainers start beta testing the Git
repos next week as the schedule suggests, I think about *now* is the
time to make a global announcement on this mailing list that
developers will need to install Git and familiarise themselves with it
sometime soon. I believe an exact date is not needed to license such
For wiki/Git/GitHome  I would like to suggest two additions:
- Add git-flow  to the "Installing Git" list.
- Add GitImmersion  to the "Learning to use Git" list.
Hope this helps!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk