lcaminiti wrote
Beman Dawes wrote
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:45 AM, lcaminiti <lorcaminiti@> wrote:
Beman Dawes wrote
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 7:55 AM, lcaminiti <lorcaminiti@> wrote:
Daniel James-3 wrote
On 22 May 2012 23:46, Eric Niebler <eric@> wrote: > > Look for an email from us shortly. I'm taking it upon myself to > reopen > the release branch for BUG FIXES ONLY (no new libraries). Please get > your changes in as soon as is convenient and prudent. It should be > open > for at least a week. Then we'll require release manager approval. > Please > be sure trunk tests are clean before merging anything, as usual.
I added a 'release branch closed' event to the calendar for next Monday, which is a little less than a week, but we normally do these things on Mondays. This is in no way final (I just picked a date), and might be changed later.
To confirm, does this mean that release is open for merging, including new features, until next Monday?
"BUG FIXES ONLY" does not include new features.
You can ask for permission to merge a new feature. If it has been stable in trunk for awhile and is otherwise low risk, then we may OK a merge. But we are playing catch up for a release that was supposed to be done at the beginning of the month, so are trying to avoid anything that will result in further delays.
Do I have permission to merge ScopeExit (improved), LocalFunction (new), Funcitonal/OverloadedFunction (new), and Utility/IdentityType (new)? If so, I can do that within today.
I'm answering your questions below from another email to assess the risk.
It is an issue of risk. How long have these changes/refactorings been stable in trunk? 1+ month.
How extensive were the changes? ScopeExit ("small" library) 20% new but all old regressions plus all new regressions pass. LocalFunction ("small/mid-size" library), OverloadedFunction ("small" library), and IdentityType ("tiny" library) 100% new.
Were the changes fragile or once they worked on your development platform, did they pass all tests on other platforms? Regressions passed on all compilers with little efforts after they passed on MSVC and GCC on my development platform. Sun, and a little bit VACPP plus PGI, were the only compilers that required some amount of extra work. All of this was done 1+ month ago in trunk. That applies to all ScopeExit, LocalFunction, OverloadedFunciton, and IdentityType.
Have you done a local merge to release, and tested the results? Yes. I tested on MSVC 8.0, GCC 4.5.3 without and without C++11 feature (that's my development platform). The tests pass on my development platform for release as they do for trunk.
Please advice.
That sounds OK to me; you have the risks pretty well covered. Several other release managers are also in favor of a go ahead, so please merge to release ASAP and keep a close eye on the release regression tests.
Will do. I'll merge by tonight.
Done. I will be watching the release regression tests very closely for the next few days. Thanks a lot. --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/1-50-0-Beta-schedule-tp4630328p4630450.ht... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.