----- Mensaje original ----- De: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su> Fecha: Viernes, Agosto 3, 2007 6:06 pm Asunto: Re: [boost] [SVN]Best Practices for developers using SVN Para: boost@lists.boost.org [...]
We actually had examples of such proactive release management in past, and it worked good, but it's clearly time consuming. So one possible solution is to
1. Document the process. 2. Distribute it in time -- for example if we have a single 'development' branch, we can record all regressions that appear on the branch and demand that they are fixed in a month, or the offending commit reverted. 3. Distribute it over people -- instead of having one release manager doing all the work, we can have "bug masters" that will focus on regressions in a subset of platforms, or subset of libraries.
This last point --having platform gurus that roam the regression landscape in search for bugs to fix in their area of platform expertise-- is something I really think we should encourage in an explicit manner. Specially in abandoned libs, which are not actively evolved, new regressions are typically a side effect of distant changes in other libs, and these kind of problems are usually not that hard to fix even for people unacquainted with the code. I've done some routine fixing for libs other than mine for MSVC++ 6.0, and, hey, it's even moderately fun. So maybe we should issue a call for platform gurus or somehow officialize this role within the community. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo