Subject: Re: [boost] [git help] Documenting common modular boost workflows
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-24 05:28:55
Daniel James wrote:
> On 24 October 2013 08:50, Julian Gonggrijp wrote:
>> Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>> Exactly. One of the main points of modularizing is to minimize the
>>> coordination burdens associated with our processes. Especially when you
>>> have an organization of volunteers, creating a situation where one
>>> person's non-responsiveness can stymie overall progress is a bad idea.
>> Point taken. Still, you haven't taken away my worry about "conflict
>> propagation": what if a couple of conflicting modules block the newest
>> versions of 20 (or more!) other modules?
>> Is that somehow not possible? Am I missing something?
> If that happens in subversion, we have the same problem. Perhaps a
> larger one since merging to release is such a mess.
I didn't think of that. Thanks for clearing up!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk