On 7/13/2011 11:32 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
Also, I'm (again) offering the suggestion that the periodic testing be altered so that a library X on the trunk is tested againts the current state of the libraries on the release branch (that is the NEXT release).
I'm all for that model of testing. But..
I believe this would have a number of benefits - including the streamlining of the release process. It would also speed up the testing itself since the release branch changes less frequently so there would be fewer dependencies for each test.
Hm, I'm not sure that's true. It's certainly true if you are isolating the testing for each library and doing each incrementally. But that's a lot of Boost checkouts to maintain (or some complicated include managing)... Of course I'm only talking about the current Boost file structure.
This would require a change in the testing scripts - but not a huge one.
I certainly welcome patches to make this possible, and reasonable for testers. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail