Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [pimpl] No documentation for pointer semant
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-06 14:33:15

On Friday 06 June 2014 10:03:51 Dave Gomboc wrote:
> [Paul A Bristow]:
> > I unhappy with a review rigid policy that nothing can be changed during a
> > review. It isn't always helpful.
> >
> > We never accept anything without requiring some changes?
> >
> > Can we instead now use git's easy branches to specify a fixed 'master'
> > branch, but allow the author to update a 'develop' branch as the review
> > develops?
> [Edward Diener]:
> > I believe that changes can be made to a reviewed library during a review
> > as long as the 'master' branch does not change. After all we want all
> > reviewers to be looking at the same 'master' branch as the code to be
> > reviewed. But if the developer wants to make changes to other branches
> > during the review I think this should be allowed.
> May I suggest that either the library author or the review manager
> ought to, near the commencement of the review, identify a specific
> version to be reviewed? This is quite distinct from identifying a
> branch name for a conventional branch such as master that is expected
> to change frequently even over a two-week period. A specific checkout
> is typically identified by a SHA: a branch name such as 'master' is
> primarily just an alias to the SHA to which it currently resolves.

I think a tag would be a better alternative to a SHA. It's more readable and
GitHub creates a downloadable archive for it so git is not required to review
the library.

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