Re: [boost] is_pod.hpp change and RC_1_29_0

From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-04 07:15:30

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 02 November 2002 17:48, David Abrahams wrote:
>
> This is bad. We have a release which is tagged Version_1_29_0. Should
> we move the Version_1_29_0 tag on the appropriate files after applying
> the neccessary patches, thus making Version_1_29_0 different from the
> release archive, or should we leave the tag where it is, thus making
> Version_1_29_0 broken in CVS for all time?

I have committed the neccessary fixes. The tags are so far unchanged. I don't 
have a strong opinion regarding the tags.

- --Thomas

- -- 
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Witt
Institut fuer Verkehrswesen, Eisenbahnbau und -betrieb, Universitaet Hannover
voice: [phone] - 4273, fax: [phone]
http://www.ive.uni-hannover.de
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9xmTm0ds/gS3XsBoRApjWAJ9yyyi1hSUtghNLZqIrHqLD7mBq/ACghNfK
yUFefZR6G573QD9YpHwfccw=
=if8C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----