From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-15 10:50:40
Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
> At 10:26 AM 7/15/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> >Dominique Devriese <dominique.devriese_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >>> In general, they are released when all of Boost is ready. I think
> >>> it would be a *really* good idea for Boost to do at least one minor
> >>> version release shortly after any major version release. Now that
> >>> we have a reasonable testing strategy it should be relatively easy.
> >>> Boost 1.30.0 went out with several bugs IIRC.
> >>> Until we get our act together, I would suggest you supply people
> >>> with a Boost patch. Use "BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME" instead of
> >>> "typename" so you don't break VC6. Sorry,
> >> A fixed release would be great indeed. In the mean time, I'm going to
> >> provide the patch as you suggest, although it's far from a perfect
> >> solution of course..
> >What does everybody think about doing a 1.30.1 release "RSN?"
> What would be the advantage of doing a 1.30.1 release rather than a
> 1.31.0 release?
When we released 1.30.0, despite extensive pre-release testing, it
went out with several prominent showstopper bugs. Don't you think
we'll make the same mistake for 1.31.0? Also, AFAICT 1.30.1 can go
out much, much sooner.
> Seems like we are very close to being ready to do a 1.31.0
> release. One new library has been added since 1.30.0, at least two
> libraries have had interface upgrades, and a large number of bugs
> have been fixed in numerous libraries.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk