Re: [boost] El Capitan issues (Was: [1.61] Two weeks remaining for new libraries and breaking changes)

Subject: Re: [boost] El Capitan issues (Was: [1.61] Two weeks remaining for new libraries and breaking changes)
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-16 14:14:47

AMDG

On 02/16/2016 12:08 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> On 2/16/2016 1:44 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
>> 
>> Sorry, the suggestion is that on the develop test matrix, each library
>> be tested on the develop branch against the other libraries on the
>> master branch.  This would permit a developer to make an innocent
>> mistake without bringing down the whole system.
> 
> This creates a problem when code in one library in the 'develop' branch
> depends on code in another library in the 'develop' branch. I think this
> situation is far more likely than code in one library in the 'develop'
> branch having to wait until code in another library it may depend on is
> promoted to the 'master' branch of that library. Therefore while I
> understand the greater stability of testing the 'develop' branch of a
> library against the 'master' branch of all other libraries I am opposed
> to this sort of testing as a practical regression testing solution.
> 

Case in point:
https://github.com/boostorg/iostreams/pull/23
https://github.com/boostorg/build/pull/112

> Ideally we should have a testing system where one could specify for any
> given library its library dependencies, and one could also specify which
> branch of each library dependency we want to test against. But we are a
> long way from such a system at present.
> 

  Even if it were possible, I can almost guarantee
that it wouldn't be kept up-to-date.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe