Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] Deprecation of compilers and libraries
From: Jeroen Habraken (vexocide_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-17 17:04:57


Hi,

It seems the acceptance of Phoenix V3 has raised the question on how
to handle the deprecation of compilers and libraries again. I believe
it is important to reach a consensus and to make an official statement
regarding it, as it's important for both users and developers. Below
I've assembled a set of questions I would like to see answered:

Compilers:
1. What minimum of compilers should a library support for it to be
considered for review?
2. What is necessary for a compiler previously supported to be removed
from this list?

Libraries:
3. Should library X be marked as preferred over library Y, since
multiple solutions to a similar problem are becoming more common and
the right choice might not be obvious to a user?
4. Can an existing library be marked "deprecated"?
5. Once deprecated will a library be removed from boost after X releases?
6. Should a backwards compatible solution exist for a library to be removed?

Personally I believe dead branches should, in due time, be cut from
the tree for boost to remain at the forefront of C++ development.
Especially now the number of libraries is growing, we should aim for
clarity.

Regards,
Jeroen Habraken


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk