Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Update submodules in boost.git
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-07 17:45:21
Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Andrey Semashev
> <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Daniel Pfeifer <daniel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> 2013/12/5 Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]>:
>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Daniel Pfeifer <daniel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>> Tests are run on Boost/develop.
>>>>> To make a new release of Boost, you merge the changes of Boost/develop
>>>>> to Boost/master.
>>>> Does that mean that X/develop is not tested?
>>> Yes (and no). It is not integrated into Boost and it is not tested as
>>> part of Boost. The same way as the development of zlib is not tested
>>> by Debian. Just the releases are integrated and tested.
>>>> Why is it needed then?
>>> According to gitflow, this is where the development of X happens. It
>>> is also tested of course. On its own, however.
>> So this basically means that each library has to have its own testing
>> farm, and Boost serves mostly the bundling purpose. A possible
>> solution, I guess, but not sure such approach would be beneficial for
>> the quality of Boost. I doubt that individual developers will be able
>> to do the same amount of testing for their library releases as they
>> had with svn.
> Actually, thinking about it some more, this doesn't look as a good
> approach at all. First, the develop branch for the submodules becomes
> unneeded by the superproject. Individual developers may use it at
> their discretion but it doesn't matter in the big picture.
And why is that a bad thing? The only purpose of the superproject is as
a way of tracking releasable states of the whole library collection.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk