Re: [boost] 1.29.0?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-17 12:16:41

From: "Douglas Gregor" <gregod_at_[hidden]>

> > This is probably my fault. The reasons for this are a little
complicated.
> [snip good reasons]
>
> I didn't know that Boost.Python v2 was promised for 1.29.0.

It's a promise I would've broken, but I thought it would do a great
disservice to new users to release v1 again since I have already been
telling people privately that they should begin with v2 if they're starting
fresh. Anyone starting with v1 after 1.29.0 would be assured the need to do
a complete rewrite, or near-term obsolescence.

> I wonder if we
> should ask library authors to list their proposed changes for a release
in a
> single place, so that everyone can see progress toward a next release.

I think this would be a great idea, really!

> I
> suggest using the top-level boost.htm's "Latest News" section from CVS:
when
> a library author determines that a certain task should be completed
before
> the next release, add a news item for it, e.g.,
>
>   * Pending: Function library: remove deprecated function<...> syntax
>
> Once that task has been finished, make it a normal news item:
>
>   * Function library: deprecated function<..> syntax removed
>
> Then our release procedure is something like:
>   1) Finalize the 'pending' list for a particular version
>   2) Finish all pending tasks and change the entry to a news item
>   3) Stabilize/debug
>   4) Release
>
> We have #1 in some form now (someone asks "how about a release soon?"),
but I
> think it would help guide us better if we had a central list of release
> criteria.

Sounds great, really.

-----------------------------------------------------------
           David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com