[random] Merging to master for 1.75 release
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer. Glen
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
AMDG On 11/18/20 11:18 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers. In Christ, Steven Watanabe
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
On 11/18/20 11:18 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta) https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28> All the rest are fine — Marshall
On 11/24/2020 2:10 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
On 11/18/20 11:18 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta)
https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28>
All the rest are fine
The commit you cite above does not change anything for the end-user. All the fix does is use type_traits rather than mpl in a number of cases, which removes the mpl dependency for the 'random' library, and all those cases are private implementation details which does not affect the end-user's use of the library in any way. This commit is hardly adding a new feature to the 'random' library.
On Nov 24, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 11/24/2020 2:10 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
On 11/18/20 11:18 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote:
Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta) https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28><https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28 <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28>> All the rest are fine
The commit you cite above does not change anything for the end-user. All the fix does is use type_traits rather than mpl in a number of cases, which removes the mpl dependency for the 'random' library, and all those cases are private implementation details which does not affect the end-user's use of the library in any way. This commit is hardly adding a new feature to the 'random' library.
Then I copy/pasted the wrong URL; sorry. https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0dc2748> This looks like a new feature to me. (I am willing to be convinced otherwise, though) — Marshall
On 11/24/2020 5:52 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 11/24/2020 2:10 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
AMDG
On 11/18/20 11:18 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
On 11/18/2020 10:18 AM, Glen Fernandes via Boost wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 5:55 AM Edward Diener wrote: > > Is there any possibility of merging 'develop' to 'master' for the random > library for the 1.75 release ? The 'master' branch has not been updated > for 2 years, or since the 1.70 release. While I am not claiming all > invaluable fixes I know my fix for Embarcadero C++ clang-based support > and another fix for correctly auto-linking random_device is among the > 'develop' branch fixes which have never made it to the 'master' branch.
I'm assuming this is for Steven (who is the active maintainer of Random). i.e. Unlike the other repositories which we've helped out with, that are either under CMT or no active maintainer.
A maintainer of a library has the right to do what he wants. But it does not seem that Steven is aware of the situation. Also others may have write access to 'random' for all I know, and be able to review the merge and make the change. In the 'develop' regression tests for 'random' there are no issues which I can see in the results and the last change was over 4 months ago.
I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta) https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28><https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28 <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/b8d5df31168a07e04a175ace751f0defa7be5e28>> All the rest are fine
The commit you cite above does not change anything for the end-user. All the fix does is use type_traits rather than mpl in a number of cases, which removes the mpl dependency for the 'random' library, and all those cases are private implementation details which does not affect the end-user's use of the library in any way. This commit is hardly adding a new feature to the 'random' library.
Then I copy/pasted the wrong URL; sorry.
https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0dc2748>
This looks like a new feature to me. (I am willing to be convinced otherwise, though)
It is a new feature, a new generator called 'mixmax'. It appears to be tested pretty thoroughly and does not affect any other generator AFAICS. It is your call to Steven, but I would very much like to see 'random' develop merged to 'master' so the Embarcadero clang C++ support goes in. That would complete the basic support for the Embarcadero C++ clang-based compilers for all the Boost libraries. I would like to report that back to my contact at Embarcadero and then maybe they would take a more pro-active stance in supporting current Boost with their clang-based compilers.
AMDG On 11/24/20 5:52 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 11/24/2020 2:10 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
> <snip> I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta)
https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0dc2748>
I just cherry-picked everything except that one.
This looks like a new feature to me. (I am willing to be convinced otherwise, though)
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
On 11/25/2020 1:25 PM, Steven Watanabe via Boost wrote:
AMDG
On 11/24/20 5:52 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 11/24/2020 2:10 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:
On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Steven Watanabe via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
>> <snip> I can merge it now if it's okay with the release managers.
I looked at the commits since the last merge, and only this one looks problematic for a post-beta merge. (We try not to add new features after the beta)
https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0... <https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/1182a4071e6bcdaa94e4c49e4a220885b0dc2748>
I just cherry-picked everything except that one.
Thank you, Steven !
participants (4)
-
Edward Diener -
Glen Fernandes -
Marshall Clow -
Steven Watanabe