Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.DLL formal review is ongoing
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir.prus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-07-14 03:07:50

On 07-Jul-15 2:56 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> I profoundly disagree on the first point. Any new library should be
> using a per-commit CI period. The fact such services are free, and
> they make such an enormous improvement to github pull requests and
> not breaking build accidentally make them one of the key quality and
> productivity leap forwards of the past decade. To not have your
> library per-commit CI enabled is enormously retrograde, and if a
> library before review here refused to have some per-commit CI in
> place I would vote for rejection personally because such a library
> could never be of Boost quality

There is a number of existing Boost libraries, and other open-source
projects, whose quality is quite excellent despite having no per-commit
CI - for example because the maintainer has more compilers installed
locally, and more virtual machines, than all cloud CI systems combined.
Calling these maintainers retrograde is hardly appropriate.


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