Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [optional] Changes in Boost.Optional
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-01 22:20:19


On Tue Sep 02 2014 at 12:16:52 PM Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> On 9/1/2014 10:04 PM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> > On Tue Sep 02 2014 at 5:48:09 AM Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 9/1/2014 11:48 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> >>> On Tue Aug 26 2014 at 3:59:12 PM Dean Michael Berris <
> >> mikhailberis_at_[hidden]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue Aug 26 2014 at 9:38:37 AM Eric Niebler <eniebler_at_[hidden]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 08/24/2014 11:20 AM, Rob Stewart wrote:
> >>>>>> [Corrected subject to target optional.]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On August 24, 2014 7:55:11 AM EDT, Dean Michael Berris <
> >>>>> mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I realize that this message may have not passed the spam filters.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Can someone comment on the changes in Boost.Optional in 1.56.0
> >> breaking
> >>>>>>> existing code?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Dean,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't know the specifics, but if you file a bug, at least it won't
> >> get
> >>>>> lost.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Filed: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/10399
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Eric.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> It's now been almost a week and there's been no update on the issue. I
> >>> think this is serious enough that I'm positive it couldn't just be me
> >>> that's experiencing this regression.
> >>>
> >>> Can someone with access to MSVC 2010 confirm whether this indeed is an
> >>> issue, and whether it's actually a regression?
> >>>
> >>> If I wanted to get a fix in for this, whom do I send the pull request
> to
> >>> (community maintenance team) so it gets fixed for 1.57?
> >>
> >> Just make a pull request against Boost Optional.
> >
> >
> > Which fork? Just direct to the boostorg repo?
> >
> >
> >> Whoever is a Boost
> >> Optional maintainer will get the pull request. It is not up to you to
> >> have to determine, when making a pull request, who should get the
> request.
> >>
> >>
> > It actually is, because I need to determine which maintainer is active,
> > which one has access to MSVC 2010, be iterating on the pull request with
> > that maintainer's fork, and then have that maintainer in their leisure
> > merge it into the boostorg repo. If the process is a free-for-all on the
> > boostorg repo, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to say that may not
> scale
> > well especially if there's more than one maintainer of the library.
> >
> > So I ask again -- to which fork, what are the expected turn-around times
> > (who do I @mention in github) to get their attention?
>
> Look at https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/StartModPatchAndPullReq
> and follow the directions under "Pull Requests" and "Forking a Single
> Repo". Having access to MSVC 2010 should not be a big deal for a
> maintainer. If you find after your pull request that nobody is
> responding to it within a week or two after you make it, then I would
> say to post back here and try to find the right person to respond. But
> until then let the normal Pull Request process play itself out.
>
>
Interesting. Thanks for that link.

I'm sorry I have to say this, but the instructions there look like more
trouble than the normal GitHub pull request process. :(

I'm now having second thoughts on submitting a patch and just wait for a
maintainer to respond.

/me wishes Boost didn't have to break up the libraries into different
repo's.


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk