[release] 1.64.0 post-beta merges
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy> -- The Boost Release Team
I'd like to merge boost.fiber (multiple commits) which should solve some cirtical problems - do I get the permission. 2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
-- The Boost Release Team
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman /listinfo.cgi/boost
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to merge boost.fiber (multiple commits) which should solve some cirtical problems - do I get the permission.
Yes. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On 24-03-17 02:00, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy> Would this include Boost Process or have I been misinformed about its inclusion in 1.64?
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Seth via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 24-03-17 02:00, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy> Would this include Boost Process or have I been misinformed about its inclusion in 1.64?
We are working on Boost Process. It was an accidental omission. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Rene Rivera Via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
-- The Boost Release Team
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
I'd like to merge several Boost.Geometry commits into master. Small/local but important fixes and documentation updates. See the latest commits in this branch: https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commits/cherries Do I get the permission? Adam
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Adam Wulkiewicz via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to merge several Boost.Geometry commits into master. Small/local but important fixes and documentation updates. See the latest commits in this branch: https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commits/cherries Do I get the permission?
Looks reasonable. Go for it. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On 3/23/2017 9:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I would like to merge the latest rational 'develop' fixes to 'master'. One of those fixes, an earlier PR from John Maddock eliminating floating point numerators/denominators, was previously merged from 'develop' to 'master' for this release. But that PR hade some problems, which were subsequently fixed by John in 'develop' some 3 days ago. I think it is important to get John's fix of his earlier change into this release to avoid surprises for developers using 'rational'. Maybe John can comment.
-- The Boost Release Team
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/23/2017 9:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I would like to merge the latest rational 'develop' fixes to 'master'. One of those fixes, an earlier PR from John Maddock eliminating floating point numerators/denominators, was previously merged from 'develop' to 'master' for this release. But that PR hade some problems, which were subsequently fixed by John in 'develop' some 3 days ago. I think it is important to get John's fix of his earlier change into this release to avoid surprises for developers using 'rational'. Maybe John can comment.
Do you have a set of commits we can look at? -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On 3/30/2017 10:10 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/23/2017 9:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I would like to merge the latest rational 'develop' fixes to 'master'. One of those fixes, an earlier PR from John Maddock eliminating floating point numerators/denominators, was previously merged from 'develop' to 'master' for this release. But that PR hade some problems, which were subsequently fixed by John in 'develop' some 3 days ago. I think it is important to get John's fix of his earlier change into this release to avoid surprises for developers using 'rational'. Maybe John can comment.
Do you have a set of commits we can look at?
Everything from 'master' to 'devlop' in 'rational' b2fc4f28e96be10d93c05621285fcd42637aee84 eefada58f921bf1af09cb178a476b5ab58c93483 35511c16d13de5c464c00745ceb81cfed96e974c 44f1c9501b19ae6475d72b5314921be0f99570b6 304e895242aaf650a728327ef16f99d077ec9bb3 e36861a6bd3ad7eeba403b0b6a88ef09af4d6f92 d1cd08fc15594116c4a93815edb158dd56ecb08e This is really two separate fixes, but I would rather not cherry-pick the second since the first has been tested in 'develop' successfully for a while.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/30/2017 10:10 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/23/2017 9:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as
described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I would like to merge the latest rational 'develop' fixes to 'master'. One of those fixes, an earlier PR from John Maddock eliminating floating point numerators/denominators, was previously merged from 'develop' to 'master' for this release. But that PR hade some problems, which were subsequently fixed by John in 'develop' some 3 days ago. I think it is important to get John's fix of his earlier change into this release to avoid surprises for developers using 'rational'. Maybe John can comment.
Do you have a set of commits we can look at?
Everything from 'master' to 'devlop' in 'rational'
b2fc4f28e96be10d93c05621285fcd42637aee84 eefada58f921bf1af09cb178a476b5ab58c93483 35511c16d13de5c464c00745ceb81cfed96e974c 44f1c9501b19ae6475d72b5314921be0f99570b6 304e895242aaf650a728327ef16f99d077ec9bb3 e36861a6bd3ad7eeba403b0b6a88ef09af4d6f92 d1cd08fc15594116c4a93815edb158dd56ecb08e
This is really two separate fixes, but I would rather not cherry-pick the second since the first has been tested in 'develop' successfully for a while.
Looks OK. Go ahead. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On 3/31/2017 8:15 AM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:17 AM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/30/2017 10:10 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Edward Diener via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 3/23/2017 9:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as
described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I would like to merge the latest rational 'develop' fixes to 'master'. One of those fixes, an earlier PR from John Maddock eliminating floating point numerators/denominators, was previously merged from 'develop' to 'master' for this release. But that PR hade some problems, which were subsequently fixed by John in 'develop' some 3 days ago. I think it is important to get John's fix of his earlier change into this release to avoid surprises for developers using 'rational'. Maybe John can comment.
Do you have a set of commits we can look at?
Everything from 'master' to 'devlop' in 'rational'
b2fc4f28e96be10d93c05621285fcd42637aee84 eefada58f921bf1af09cb178a476b5ab58c93483 35511c16d13de5c464c00745ceb81cfed96e974c 44f1c9501b19ae6475d72b5314921be0f99570b6 304e895242aaf650a728327ef16f99d077ec9bb3 e36861a6bd3ad7eeba403b0b6a88ef09af4d6f92 d1cd08fc15594116c4a93815edb158dd56ecb08e
This is really two separate fixes, but I would rather not cherry-pick the second since the first has been tested in 'develop' successfully for a while.
Looks OK. Go ahead.
I have merged 'develop' to 'master' for rational. I will continue to monitor tests to make sure nothing strange shows.
Hello, will the post beta merges (context + fiber) be part of boost-1.64 release? If yes, I would update the changelog for fixed bugs. Oliver
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Hello, will the post beta merges (context + fiber) be part of boost-1.64 release? If yes, I would update the changelog for fixed bugs.
If they are in master, yes. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
2017-04-01 14:45 GMT+02:00 Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Hello, will the post beta merges (context + fiber) be part of boost-1.64 release? If yes, I would update the changelog for fixed bugs.
If they are in master, yes.
I'd like to merge two commits into master: ARM related: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/3ab6beafed1f4d105a2e5592575363e8d9c... documentation: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/a250afad32ae505c8d89ebafd798caaab0c...
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Oliver Kowalke <oliver.kowalke@gmail.com> wrote:
2017-04-01 14:45 GMT+02:00 Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Hello, will the post beta merges (context + fiber) be part of boost-1.64 release? If yes, I would update the changelog for fixed bugs.
If they are in master, yes.
I'd like to merge two commits into master:
ARM related: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/ 3ab6beafed1f4d105a2e5592575363e8d9c47bc3 documentation: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/ a250afad32ae505c8d89ebafd798caaab0cb1673
Looks good. Go for it. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
2017-04-02 17:56 GMT+02:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
Looks good. Go for it.
ty, but after Andrey's post I've made some changes: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/47da124dd27697d4fa8836f0a23ac51068f... https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/779651736360e1f5736da6499172ed62463... https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/6c9361f81dd78f7d8501dee9e77240b4694... https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/47dedcc1ce22417fe2dc7ee2a5cf9a54a6a... The fixes are small, I hope it's OK to merge them too. ty, Oliver
On Apr 2, 2017 11:01 AM, "Oliver Kowalke" <oliver.kowalke@gmail.com> wrote: 2017-04-02 17:56 GMT+02:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
Looks good. Go for it.
ty, but after Andrey's post I've made some changes: https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/47da124dd27697d4fa8836f0a23ac5 1068f95763 https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/779651736360e1f5736da6499172ed 624635fef7 https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/6c9361f81dd78f7d8501dee9e77240 b469492050 https://github.com/boostorg/fiber/commit/47dedcc1ce22417fe2dc7ee2a5cf9a 54a6a58e53 The fixes are small, I hope it's OK to merge them too. Looks somewhat less isolated.. If you can wait a day to see if tests look ok that would be ideal. If they are ok after that go ahead and merge.
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Hello Rene, I go a new bugfix submitted today - I'd like to merge it because it fixes powerpc64 implementation: https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/c76b5d224a39e6f0f679e6a8cb54c15ac... Oliver
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:41 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Hello Rene, I go a new bugfix submitted today - I'd like to merge it because it fixes powerpc64 implementation: https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/c76b5d224a39e6f0f679e6a8cb54c1 5ac6e44c77
Go ahead. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
2017-04-05 13:56 GMT+02:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:41 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Hello Rene, I go a new bugfix submitted today - I'd like to merge it because it fixes powerpc64 implementation: https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/ c76b5d224a39e6f0f679e6a8cb54c1 5ac6e44c77
Go ahead.
I got an addtional bugreport today. It is related to Android ( https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/12948). I'd like to merge the fix ( https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/64d8d1445b46fe27042af165749538ce7... ) to master.
On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I got an addtional bugreport today. It is related to Android ( https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/12948).
I'd like to merge the fix ( https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/64d8d1445b46fe27042af165749538 ce79b674fa ) to master.
OK. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to merge a couple of minor Boost.Utility changes. They have to do with string_view and string_ref accepting rvalue strings - reverting a change I made, so we get the same behavior as 1.63.
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Marshall Clow via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to merge a couple of minor Boost.Utility changes. They have to do with string_view and string_ref accepting rvalue strings - reverting a change I made, so we get the same behavior as 1.63.
OK. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Also, there's an exception message in Boost.Format I'd like to merge. Just changes the string that's returned from ::what() to be gramatically correct. -- Marshall
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Marshall Clow via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Also, there's an exception message in Boost.Format I'd like to merge. Just changes the string that's returned from ::what() to be gramatically correct.
OK. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Marshall Clow via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Also, there's an exception message in Boost.Format I'd like to merge. Just changes the string that's returned from ::what() to be gramatically correct.
Just wondering, why isn't this done via (links to) pull requests? -- Olaf
There is a bugfix and a few other minor improvements in the develop branch of Boost Exception that are not merged into master. Tests pass. I think it would be nice if these changes make it into this release. Emil On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
-- The Boost Release Team
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/ mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski@gmail.com> wrote:
There is a bugfix and a few other minor improvements in the develop branch of Boost Exception that are not merged into master. Tests pass. I think it would be nice if these changes make it into this release.
Since I don't know enough of that context.. Can you post some links to the changes? -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to merge changes for bosot.context/boost.fiber - unit-tests, docu, local statics
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to merge changes for bosot.context/boost.fiber - unit-tests, docu, local statics
I don't know what you mean by "local statics".. But unit-tests and documentation changes are OK. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to update - boost.context: updating documentation regarding to property context-switch, apply property context-switch to Jamfiles in sub-directory example - boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
On 8 April 2017 at 10:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to update
- boost.context: updating documentation regarding to property context-switch, apply property context-switch to Jamfiles in sub-directory example
I don't know enough about boost build for this one, but the change to 'include/boost/context/execution_context.hpp' seems unnecessary. It doesn't look like it will fix anything.
- boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
That look okay to me, but wait for some test results to come in first.
2017-04-08 13:44 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 10:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to update
- boost.context: updating documentation regarding to property context-switch, apply property context-switch to Jamfiles in
sub-directory
example
I don't know enough about boost build for this one, but the change to 'include/boost/context/execution_context.hpp' seems unnecessary. It doesn't look like it will fix anything.
one part of the commit does code clean-up: if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)) to if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
- boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
That look okay to me, but wait for some test results to come in first.
example egmented stack was already commented out in Jamfile, e.g. never compiler removing the source and the entry from the Jamfile shouldn't influence the tests
On 8 April 2017 at 19:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
one part of the commit does code clean-up:
if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1))
to
if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
This isn't really the time for cleaning up code.
- boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
That look okay to me, but wait for some test results to come in first.
example egmented stack was already commented out in Jamfile, e.g. never compiler removing the source and the entry from the Jamfile shouldn't influence the tests
Is it that hard to wait? A day should be enough.
2017-04-08 21:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 19:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
one part of the commit does code clean-up:
if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1))
to
if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
This isn't really the time for cleaning up code.
but it's part of a commit that is necessary that users can select the API
- boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
That look okay to me, but wait for some test results to come in first.
example egmented stack was already commented out in Jamfile, e.g. never compiler removing the source and the entry from the Jamfile shouldn't influence the tests
Is it that hard to wait? A day should be enough.
it's not a problem - only dead code (non-compiled example) is removed -> it will not influence the results
On 8 April 2017 at 20:26, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-04-08 21:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 19:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
one part of the commit does code clean-up:
if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1))
to
if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
This isn't really the time for cleaning up code.
but it's part of a commit that is necessary that users can select the API
Maybe it shouldn't have been? But as I said, I don't think I can comment on the rest of the commit. I really don't know enough about boost build.
- boost.coroutine2: remove segmented stack example
That look okay to me, but wait for some test results to come in first.
example egmented stack was already commented out in Jamfile, e.g. never compiler removing the source and the entry from the Jamfile shouldn't influence the tests
Is it that hard to wait? A day should be enough.
it's not a problem - only dead code (non-compiled example) is removed -> it will not influence the results
Then when you check it tomorrow all will be fine. I don't understand why this is so unbearable and worth spending a Saturday arguing about. It's a pretty basic precaution.
2017-04-08 21:51 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 20:26, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-04-08 21:16 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org :
On 8 April 2017 at 19:47, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
one part of the commit does code clean-up:
if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT ==
1))
to
if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
This isn't really the time for cleaning up code.
but it's part of a commit that is necessary that users can select the API
Maybe it shouldn't have been? But as I said, I don't think I can comment on the rest of the commit. I really don't know enough about boost build.
I could re-write the commit and remove the modified line in execution_context.hpp The commit will then contain documetation that explains how to enable/disable the APIs with the special boost.build property + modified Jamfiles from the examples. Could I get then the OK to merge?
On 8 April 2017 at 21:10, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I could re-write the commit and remove the modified line in execution_context.hpp The commit will then contain documetation that explains how to enable/disable the APIs with the special boost.build property + modified Jamfiles from the examples. Could I get then the OK to merge?
I honestly don't know. It looks like '<context-switch>ec' is supported in released code, and this might break builds which use that, but then again, it might not, or it might not matter. It really needs someone who understands boost build features to look at it, and that isn't me. The comment about about header file was only a minor point really.
2017-04-08 22:35 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 21:10, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I could re-write the commit and remove the modified line in execution_context.hpp The commit will then contain documetation that explains how to enable/disable the APIs with the special boost.build property + modified Jamfiles from the
examples.
Could I get then the OK to merge?
I honestly don't know. It looks like '<context-switch>ec' is supported in released code, and this might break builds which use that, but then again, it might not, or it might not matter. It really needs someone who understands boost build features to look at it, and that isn't me.
'<context-switch>ec' was wrong, ec must be ec1 and ec2 <context-switch>ec1 == build with execution_context (v1) <context-switch>ec2 == build with execution_context<> (v2) <context-switch>cc == build with callcc() (default API) the commit fixes a problem
On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-04-08 22:35 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 8 April 2017 at 21:10, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I could re-write the commit and remove the modified line in execution_context.hpp The commit will then contain documetation that explains how to enable/disable the APIs with the special boost.build property + modified Jamfiles from the
examples.
Could I get then the OK to merge?
I honestly don't know. It looks like '<context-switch>ec' is supported in released code, and this might break builds which use that, but then again, it might not, or it might not matter. It really needs someone who understands boost build features to look at it, and that isn't me.
'<context-switch>ec' was wrong, ec must be ec1 and ec2 <context-switch>ec1 == build with execution_context (v1) <context-switch>ec2 == build with execution_context<> (v2) <context-switch>cc == build with callcc() (default API)
the commit fixes a problem
Here's my take on the overall change < https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/9e3f5fdcd9b213213ad7c319cbb96c37be9f80ca> (that's the right change?).. Jamfile.v2.. If the context-switch feature existed in a previous release it would be safer to change it to the values "cc ec ec1 ec2", and make ec and ec1 be equivalent by setting the same define. General.. You can't rely on people using Boost Build to build the library. Hence just documenting "build property ['context-switch=ec1]" etc is not sufficient for users. But ultimately this is your call as to what you expect users to do. execution_context.cpp: -# if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)) +# if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1) I would consider that change dangerous. If users are not building with b2 there is a high probability they will not define BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT. Unless you define it to some default some place I can't immediately see in that commit. So I'd say the change is risky. And I would prefer if you find a way to make it safer. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
AMDG On 04/08/2017 08:35 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
execution_context.cpp: -# if (defined(BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT) && (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)) +# if (BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT == 1)
I would consider that change dangerous. If users are not building with b2 there is a high probability they will not define BOOST_EXECUTION_CONTEXT. Unless you define it to some default some place I can't immediately see in that commit.
Technically, the two are equivalent, but the new version may generate warnings, depending on compiler options.
So I'd say the change is risky. And I would prefer if you find a way to make it safer.
In Christ, Steven Watanabe
I'd like to merge a fix [1] for a regression [2] in Hana. The fix is already in develop, but I'd like to merge it on master so the regression does not make it into 1.64. Can I? Thanks, Louis [1]: https://github.com/boostorg/hana/pull/332 [2]: https://github.com/boostorg/hana/issues/331 -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/release-1-64-0-post-beta-merges-tp4692872... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Louis Dionne via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to merge a fix [1] for a regression [2] in Hana. The fix is already in develop, but I'd like to merge it on master so the regression does not make it into 1.64. Can I?
Thanks, Louis
[1]: https://github.com/boostorg/hana/pull/332 [2]: https://github.com/boostorg/hana/issues/331
Look OK. Go ahead. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Rene Rivera Via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
I'd like to push a small fix: https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commit/657a5c80902edc9640a06571c2762a5d... https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commit/e3ac044400748e23d7a5a708b47bb8fe... for: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/11899 Do I get the permission? Adam
On 9 April 2017 at 11:58, Adam Wulkiewicz via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to push a small fix: https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commit/657a5c80902edc9640a06571c2762a5d... https://github.com/boostorg/geometry/commit/e3ac044400748e23d7a5a708b47bb8fe... for: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/11899 Do I get the permission?
Yes, but wait for the test results to be clear.
On 24/03/2017 2:00, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Hi, I'd like to merge a fix [1] for a bug [2] in move/unique_ptr. I'd like to merge it on master so the bug is fixed in 1.64. [1] https://github.com/boostorg/move/commit/1dbc7bab5c421118c2e06c79f1994a04d23b... [2] https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/12920 Best, Ion
On 9 April 2017 at 12:54, Ion Gaztañaga via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to merge a fix [1] for a bug [2] in move/unique_ptr. I'd like to merge it on master so the bug is fixed in 1.64.
[1] https://github.com/boostorg/move/commit/1dbc7bab5c421118c2e06c79f1994a04d23b...
Yes, but wait for the test results to be clear.
On 09/04/2017 14:08, Daniel James via Boost wrote:
On 9 April 2017 at 12:54, Ion Gaztañaga via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd like to merge a fix [1] for a bug [2] in move/unique_ptr. I'd like to merge it on master so the bug is fixed in 1.64.
[1] https://github.com/boostorg/move/commit/1dbc7bab5c421118c2e06c79f1994a04d23b...
Yes, but wait for the test results to be clear.
Ok, thanks Ion
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Do I get permission to update the documentation? I could revert the last commit and update only the documentation so that the users get a hint how to choose the appropriate API.
On 9 April 2017 at 13:20, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Do I get permission to update the documentation? I could revert the last commit and update only the documentation so that the users get a hint how to choose the appropriate API.
Documentation changes are fine, but Rene's suggestions shouldn't be too hard to implement,
2017-04-09 14:28 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 9 April 2017 at 13:20, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-03-24 2:00 GMT+01:00 Rene Rivera via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy. See < https://github.com/boostorg/boost/wiki/Release-Beta-Merge-Policy>
Do I get permission to update the documentation? I could revert the last commit and update only the documentation so that the users get a hint how to choose the appropriate API.
Documentation changes are fine, but Rene's suggestions shouldn't be too hard to implement,
maybe I misunderstood the last comments - is it sufficient to keep execution _context.hpp unmodified (no code clean-up) and extending the definition of property context-switch to values "cc ec ec1 ec2" to get permission to merge the commit into master?
On 9 April 2017 at 13:56, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
maybe I misunderstood the last comments - is it sufficient to keep execution _context.hpp unmodified (no code clean-up) and extending the definition of property context-switch to values "cc ec ec1 ec2" to get permission to merge the commit into master?
IMO yes, but wait for test results, and to give Rene a chance to say if he disagrees.
2017-04-09 14:58 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 9 April 2017 at 13:56, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
maybe I misunderstood the last comments - is it sufficient to keep
execution
_context.hpp unmodified (no code clean-up) and extending the definition of property context-switch to values "cc ec ec1 ec2" to get permission to merge the commit into master?
IMO yes, but wait for test results, and to give Rene a chance to say if he disagrees.
OK, I've changed the commit ( https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/3ab7b0f9a058da0905f071f07eb88504d...) - I hope it fulfills the requirements.
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Oliver Kowalke via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
2017-04-09 14:58 GMT+02:00 Daniel James via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org>:
On 9 April 2017 at 13:56, Oliver Kowalke via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
maybe I misunderstood the last comments - is it sufficient to keep
execution
_context.hpp unmodified (no code clean-up) and extending the definition of property context-switch to values "cc ec ec1 ec2" to get permission to merge the commit into master?
IMO yes, but wait for test results, and to give Rene a chance to say if he disagrees.
OK, I've changed the commit ( https://github.com/boostorg/context/commit/3ab7b0f9a058da0905f071f07eb885 04da04440d) - I hope it fulfills the requirements.
Looks good to me now :-) -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
El 24/03/2017 a las 2:00, Rene Rivera via Boost escribió:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy.
Hi René, I'm asking permission to merge the following to master for Boost 1.64: https://github.com/boostorg/multi_index/commit/3e1095d6098a2ef28c796be4a9937... This is a very straightforward fix for the bug described at: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/12955 The bug is serious in the sense that there's no possible workaround on the user's side. This has already cycled throw several test runners in develop without problems. Joaquín M López Muñoz
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
El 24/03/2017 a las 2:00, Rene Rivera via Boost escribió:
The master branch is is now open for post-beta merges, but only as described in the Post-Beta Merge Policy.
Hi René,
I'm asking permission to merge the following to master for Boost 1.64:
https://github.com/boostorg/multi_index/commit/3e1095d6098a2 ef28c796be4a99371a82b4ebd3e
This is a very straightforward fix for the bug described at:
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/12955
The bug is serious in the sense that there's no possible workaround on the user's side. This has already cycled throw several test runners in develop without problems.
Go ahead. -- -- Rene Rivera -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
participants (13)
-
Adam Wulkiewicz -
Daniel James -
Edward Diener -
Emil Dotchevski -
Ion Gaztañaga -
Joaquin M López Muñoz -
Louis Dionne -
Marshall Clow -
Olaf van der Spek -
Oliver Kowalke -
Rene Rivera -
Seth -
Steven Watanabe