Subject: Re: [boost] Review request: Require a SFINAE capable compiler
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-14 03:43:08
> I don't see how my work makes this any harder. At *worst*, a bug fix
> will have a part in the positive side of an ifdef for some feature (like
> BOOST_NO_SFINAE), and a part in the negative side of it. I don't think
> that's even a likely scenario. Also, that's assuming the one who writes
> the patch patches both sides of the ifdef.
> That is still trivial to cherry-plck into the trunk branch. Or do you
> think it is not trivial? In that case, what makes it non-trivial?
> I want to understand the problem that exists and is stalling me.
If person A makes a commit that breaks the tests from running, person B
can't see if his changes are working or not. So high risk changes to common
code in Trunk should be discouraged during the release period.
PS, I'm not saying you will break anything, just that with the number of
changes going through.... chances are you're bound to... I would!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk