Re: [boost] Request for a new submodule, tools/depinst

Subject: Re: [boost] Request for a new submodule, tools/depinst
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-11-11 14:45:50

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> On 11/11/16 21:26, Rene Rivera wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> wgetting a random version rubs me the wrong way. Test results should be
>>> reproducible.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm.. Are you saying that getting an old version of the regression tools
>> that "matches" a particular checkout of the libraries at some point in
>> time
>> should always work and be a measure of reproduction?
>>
>
> I think that's correct. In my work, I have a number of scripts to build
> various libraries, some of which are downloaded from git or other SCMs. It
> is essential that whenever those scripts are run, they use exactly the same
> source to build the package. This is usually achieved by checking out a
> particular tag or revision.
>

See my answer to this in the other response.. But essentially.. Think about
what happens when the test infrastructure changes.

I think Boost, as a whole, should support this usage. I realize that
> checking out a particular revision of each git submodule will always work,
> but since we already use superproject as the synchronization means of
> different submodules, checking out a revision of superproject should work.

Haha.. That's really funny. The super project gives as much synchronization
guarantee as a human passing around pieces of physical paper around the
world as he makes changes to them ;-)

-- 
-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail