Re: Do we still want develop branch?

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-11-06 16:22:00

On 11/6/23 6:59 AM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
> On 11/6/23 12:45, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:
>>
>> I do see a value in having a separate develop and master branch: During
>> release cycles you can continue working on develop while master is
>> frozen for the ongoing release.
>> Besides that it is true that feature branches should be enough and
>> develop could be removed.
> 
> To be clear, if Boost as a whole stops using develop, it doesn't
> prohibit you from having a branch like that; you can even name it
> develop, if you like. That is, if master is frozen, you are free to
> continue your work in other branches.
> 
> Of course, you would be testing your changes against master branches of
> the rest of Boost. I suspect, it wouldn't make much of a difference in
> terms of the "stability" of the Boost release.

That's what I do on my own machine.  It's hugely effective in avoiding 
the time spent in tracking down failures which turn out to failures in 
other libraries.  This would result in a big improvement in boost.

Robert Ramey
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>