Re: [boost] Re: format library missing from status tests

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-24 08:47:07

From: "Markus Schöpflin" <markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden]>

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>  > Anyway, it was only a half-serious suggestion. My point is that if
>  > people have patches which make the difference between Boost working
>  > and not working on a given platform, they should try to post them
>  > before we branch for release. After a release branch it becomes
>  > increasingly hard to roll fixes into the branch and still get them
>  > into the trunk correctly.
>
> Hey, wait a second. I have been posting patches now almost contantly for
> three weeks (or contacting library authors privately) because I started
> working on AIX with VisualAge C++ three weeks ago. I tried to fix the
> problems as I encountered them. Are you trying to tell me that I should
> not post the patches just because a branch for release just happened?

No, but we should be clear about whether we're going to try to get this
platform working for 1.29.0 or not. Did you expect these to go into the
release candidate branch, or just the main trunk?

Maybe we should be using the SF patch manager for these things, so that
patches don't risk being forgotten if not immediately applied. On the other
hand, some projects which do use the patch manager have a backlog of
not-applied patches.

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