From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-24 14:03:31
Beman Dawes wrote:
> In many ways the preparation Boost 1.30.0 went very well, and the
> resulting release seems very high quality to me.
> There were rough edges of course, and we'll try to make some
> in coming months. Mostly just procedural stuff like making sure we
> have an active maintainer for all libraries, and getting maintainers
> to make major changes earlier in the process.
> The worst problem seems to me to be that our bug and patch tracking is
> totally dysfunctional.
I would like to add an idea that I have mentioned in the past; which is that
each library have some documentation on the changes made from release to
release, at least on the order of major things happening such as features
being added or changed or deleted, so that the end user has some idea of
what is different in the new release for that library. I find the idea that
such documentation does not exist really disturbing. I believe library
implementors have to take responsibility for such documentation although I
imagine a patch tracking system would help.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk