Subject: Re: [boost] [git help] Documenting common modular boost workflows
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-22 22:51:21
on Mon Oct 21 2013, Daryle Walker <darylew-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
> Since a project thatâs made of a bunch of sub-repositories thatâs
> later merged is (AFAIK) unusual, I donât think the writer of gitflow
> had it in mind.
> Iâm guessing that each sub-repository independently uses gitflow.
> When itâs shipping time, the release-merge script grabs from the
> âmasterâ branch of each sub-repository. Of course, this doesnât cover
> multiple libraries that have to work together or what happens when
> fixing is necessary (probably due to cross-library problems).
> And do the test runners work off âdevelop,â âmaster,â ârelease,â or
> does it shift depending where we are in the release cycle?
Ideally, we'd test everything, in this priority order:
> Sent from Windows Mail
> From: Peter Dimov
> Sent: âMondayâ, âOctoberâ â21â, â2013 â10â:â16â âAM
> To: Boost Dev-List
> Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> IIUC we already agreed long ago to use gitflow:
> It's not entirely clear to me what using gitflow would mean in the context
> of a Boost superproject with per-library submodules. Who is "we" who would
> be using gitflow, the Boost release managers or the library
> When Boost release 1.64.0 is started, who is going to create the gitflow
> release branch,
A Boost release manager
> and from what?
>From the "master" branch of the top-level Boost repository
-- Dave Abrahams
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk