Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] A proposal for superproject structure and testing
From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-12 15:21:47

On 9 December 2013 12:16, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> To expand on what I said in a previous message, I suggest the following
> structure for the superproject:
> - branch "latest": automatically tracks "develop" of submodules (scripted).
> - branch "develop": automatically tracks "master" of submodules (scripted).
> - branch "master": contains either the last release or the current release
> candidate.
> (This naming reflects a gitflow model. An alternative would be to use the
> more traditional unstable/stable for latest/develop.)

I'd rather use the alternative names. It's a bit confusing to have a
"develop" branch which doesn't have "develop" submodules.

> Test runners test all three, in sequence.

I like that this fits our current capabilities. But I worry about the
increased demand of running three branches, the tests were already
cycling pretty slowly with just two branches. I suppose we wouldn't
need to run master until the later stages of a release cycle, which
might help.

> Release preparation starts with a gitflow release branch from
> boostorg:develop. The release manager then runs local tests and, if
> necessary, applies fixes on the branch by downgrading submodules to an
> earlier version or asking the submodule maintainer to resolve a problem and
> then upgrading the submodule to the later version.

I think that task would need to be shared out amongst more than one
person. It shouldn't be too hard to coordinate with an online
spreadsheet or something similar.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at