Doesn't this only amplify Boinc's responsibility to modernise ? ( in the 
respect that modern projects rely on Boinc and Boinc has few resources, so 
needs to delegate...)

Jason Richard Groothuis

From: boinc_dev <> on behalf of Oliver Bock 
Sent: Tuesday, 8 August 2017 18:30
To: Laurence; Laurence Field
Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] Software development and branches, was Re: 
[boinc_projects] keywords

On 08/08/17 10:46 , Laurence wrote:
> However, there is an assumption here that the build and testing
> is all done by the project.

Up to a certain point I think that's true (see below).

> For the Linux client on Fedora (and Debian),
> only a reference to the code in git is required. What is version
> major.minor.release? This needs to be a commit rather than a branch as
> it must be immutable and hence reproducible over time.
> The code is built
> from source and packaged using the Fedora infrastructure. It will then
> be put into a testing repository and only released once validated.

Correct. However, in my opinion that's a different kind of building and
testing. Packages in testing repos of distribution don't necessarily
contain untested or potentially unstable software. Those repo are first
and foremost meant to test the distribution-specific building and
packaging itself as well as the package integration into the whole
distribution. The packages are typically still based on software that's
released for production use by the upstream projects.

That said, in my opinion an upstream project like BOINC does indeed its
share of building and testing and only releases versions (as builds or
source code) that it's confident to be stable to the best of its knowledge.

> If
> issues are found the build can be patched resulting in version
> major.minor.release-patch or the fix gets back upstream and a new
> version will be taken.



boinc_dev mailing list
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.

Reply via email to