From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-17 19:04:47
At 05:56 PM 9/17/2002, Paul Mensonides wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
>> > Also, I haven't understood Mr. Abrahams idea about a boost release
>> > being "something available". I think we should not forget that when
>> > boost releases there will certainly be a lot of people that will
>> > using the released code. If the goal is only to have the code
>> > available for the committee why not creating e.g. a "committee
>> > sandbox" instead of binding people with something released in a hurry
>> > and, above all, not (expressly) for their use?
>> This is out of context. 1.29.0 was supposed to go out a month ago.
>> the problem that is being discussed.
>This is partly because of me. I had to stabilize the preprocessor
>in on relatively short notice, and several other library's are using it,
>so they were waiting for me.
It wasn't a problem with any one person or library. More a confluence of
Look at it this way; many commercial software projects would consider it a
plus to only miss a ship target by a month. Not to mention we should be
thankful that several Boost developers were willing to put in long hours to
deal with various situations that arose.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk