From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-20 14:31:34
At 03:42 PM 12/19/99 -0500, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>This is an issue we're going to need to tackle sooner or later.
>Here are some questions; I'm sure there are more:
>1. Since the libraries are interdependent, shouldn't boost overall
>version-numbering scheme so that users can refer to a version they
Sure. What's your favorite? Just start at 1.00 and increment each
time I build the boost_all.zip file?
>2. Should we care about link compatibility of earlier and later
>should we just require a recompile? (I favor the latter)
>X. [can of worms] When (and how) can we make changes to libraries
>render them incompatible with previous versions?
Lots of developers try to limit introduction of incompatibilities to
major releases, not just .something releases. That takes a certain
amount of self-discipline, however.
How do some of the others do it? Do the EGCS people internally
announce a target date for a major release, and then contributors try
to get their stuff ready for that release?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk