Re: [boost] A proposal for superproject structure and testing

Subject: Re: [boost] A proposal for superproject structure and testing
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-12 08:09:09

Cox, Michael wrote:
> I don't expect the criteria to merge changes from a feature branch to the 
> develop branch to be successful builds/tests for *all *supported 
> compilers/platforms (that sounds like a good criteria for merging the 
> develop branches into the master branches).  I would expect something 
> along the lines of an incremental build of a freshly pulled set of 
> repositories and running the tests for your compiler/platform.

Sure, that's just common sense and basically what we've been already doing. 
A change to the public develop branch (the svn trunk in the old world) 
implies that local testing *of the submodule* has been done. Not of all of 
Boost; this takes too much time even on a single compiler/platform. (This 
doesn't specify whether the local change to the develop branch has been a 
feature branch merge or something else; it doesn't matter.)

In practice, a single compiler is not enough; on Windows, one needs at least 
one version of MSVC, at least one version of GCC, at least one non-C++11 
compiler, at least one C++11 compiler.