Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.DLL formal review is ongoing
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir.prus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-07-14 03:07:50
On 07-Jul-15 2:56 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> I profoundly disagree on the first point. Any new library should be
> using a per-commit CI period. The fact such services are free, and
> they make such an enormous improvement to github pull requests and
> not breaking build accidentally make them one of the key quality and
> productivity leap forwards of the past decade. To not have your
> library per-commit CI enabled is enormously retrograde, and if a
> library before review here refused to have some per-commit CI in
> place I would vote for rejection personally because such a library
> could never be of Boost quality
There is a number of existing Boost libraries, and other open-source
projects, whose quality is quite excellent despite having no per-commit
CI - for example because the maintainer has more compilers installed
locally, and more virtual machines, than all cloud CI systems combined.
Calling these maintainers retrograde is hardly appropriate.
Thanks,
Volodya