Re: [boost] A proposal for superproject structure and testing

12 Dec 2013


      On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Beman Dawes  wrote:
...
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Peter Dimov  wrote:
...
Cox, Michael wrote:
...
...
is that it builds and the unit-tests all pass with the current HEADs of
I'm assuming the criteria to merge a feature branch to the develop
branch
the
...
develop branches of all the other submodules.
That's very unlikely. One, nobody does a full Boost test cycle before
integrating work into develop, because a single compiler takes (I think)
8
hours or so, and you need at least two [platforms], if not more. Two,
unit
tests don't just have to pass on a single compiler, and the test
infrastructure doesn't take "test my feature branch please" requests at
the
moment. So you have to merge to develop in order to have the change
tested
on the full range of compilers.
In practice, our current workflow has been: you test locally on a few
compilers, merge (or push) into develop, wait three days to a week for
the
tests to cycle, and if everything looks fine and nobody politely informs
you that their library suddenly broke, merge into master. Or forget to
merge into master, as the case might often be with svn.
In other words, Boost testing has complexity l*m*n where l is the number of
libraries, m is the number of platforms, and n is the number of compilers
for the platform.
I don't expect the criteria to merge changes from a feature branch to the
develop branch to be successful builds/tests for *all *supported
compilers/platforms (that sounds like a good criteria for merging the
develop branches into the master branches).  I would expect something along
the lines of an incremental build of a freshly pulled set of repositories
and running the tests for your compiler/platform.  If this merge criteria
isn't suitable, what is the merge criteria?  Will it be consistent for all
libraries or will it vary depending on the nature of the library, e.g.,
whether the library is "small", "medium", or "large"?  How would "small",
"medium", or "large" be defined?

Michael
...
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost