Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years

Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years
From: Dave Gomboc (dave_gomboc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-27 14:04:00

I get the digests, so I'm quoting from a number of different emails on
this thread in this message.

> > Both contain a fix for this.  On stack overflow the proposed fix is
> > literally a single line change.
>
> The issue is addressed in devel branch with somewhat better fix
> long long time ago.

It is important that tickets be updated to reflect such information.

> > If there are issues fixed in develop branch, it would help a lot
> > to inform users by updating the tickets accordingly.
>
> Here is a blanket update message: at this point all the issues with
> Boost.Test are fixed on devel branch ;).

This doesn't help people who filed a ticket (perhaps years ago) but
don't happen to catch this email.

> > This has been a problem for about 5 years and these simple fixes don't
> > make it into the library.
>
> This is going to be released as part of the effort of merging devel into
> master. Now, when this happens depends only on docs upgrade.

It seems that in addition to documentation upgrades/improvements there
is at least also the issue of identifying all Boost.Test-related
tickets that are currently outstanding, verifying that the issue
raised within them is indeed resolved within the development branch
(rather than just assuming this is true), and updating the ticket to
reflect that the problem has been resolved in the development branch
(though it should not be closed yet until a new Boost release comes
out with the fix in place).

> All in all "devel to master upgrade" is one target I really want to reach
> and is what I plan to concentrate my effort on. You are still welcome to
> help with this if you are up to it.

Excellent!  If it has really been five years (or even if it has been
only one full year) since this last happened, then may I suggest that
this should be your sole target for Boost.Test until this task is
accomplished, that your target should be prior to the next major
release of Boost, and that obtaining assistance be an important part
of your plan to accomplishing this task within this timeframe?

To that end, could you please provide for the Boost community a
detailed outline of exactly what remains to be done in order for the
merge of the latest Boost.Test to master to be completed?  Please be
clear about exactly what others can help with, and in the cases where
you think nobody else can help you, why that is so. Please do so here
on the mailing list rather than ask people to contact you privately
about it, so that more people will know what remains to be done and
may be willing to lend a hand so it can get done.

> > 1. What are the reason(s) why-list_content is not (yet)
> > added to the release? Is there any schedule for its release?
>
> I need to document all these new features to release new Boost.Test

Can you provide a list of these new features alphabetically by name
with a one-sentence description?  Boosters can sign up for writing
documentation paragraphs, can contribute them here, and you can
collect and use them.

> > Yes. I fully agree with this statement. I hope to get back to this list
> > with more concrete schedule soon. And if you are interested to push this
> > even sooner - please feel free to help.
>
> That's great news. I know a vast amount of work has gone into develop
> and we'll all benefit when it finally gets merged into master. Yes, I'm
> happy to support this effort as best I can. Feel free to contact me
> off-list.

Rather than contact people off-list, I urge you to get all of the
outstanding work into the open and use this mailing list for
co-ordination not only so that people can contribute without
overlapping their effort needlessly, but so that the current status is
visible to all of us.  That last point is rather important: I know of
projects that have chosen alternative testing frameworks simply
because of the lack of visibility re: Boost.Test.

> Thanks for working hard to move this forward. Boost.Test has always been
> a critical library and as a result somewhat of a thankless task to
> maintain given the constant risk of breakage across Boost as a whole.
> Thanks for persevering.

I absolutely concur with this.  Your efforts are appreciated, Gennady!
 You've been shouldering the entire burden for too long.  I think that
by publicly coordinating and leading the remaining effort to get the
latest Boost.Test onto master, you'll be able to achieve this goal
more quickly.

Dave