Re: [boost] Re: Boost 1.31 release?

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-12 04:39:29

Alisdair Meredith wrote:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> 
> > While I totally support the failures markup goal, I would like to see
> > _the_ release criteria to include "no regressions from the previous
> > release" item as well, preferrably for all non-beta compilers that are
> > currently under regression testing. Especially since now we have tools
> > to ensure it.
> 
> OTOH, it might not always be achievable.
> For boost 1.31 we are having an interface breaking change to the
> iterator_adaptors, and not all compilers pass all tests with the new
> adaptors yet.
> 
> While this may not be a problem for the iterators library (it is
> effectively new) 

Yes.

> it may have a knock-on effect on any other boost libraries implemented
> on top of it.

And any failures concerned with the interface change per se should be 
fixed before the release. It might happen that major changes in a 
library inadvertently cause _functionality regression_ on the particular
compiler, but IMO "inadvertently" is a key word here.

> 
> The principle is a good one, but I be prepared to make a few allowances
> in the practice.

Sure, as long as it's an explicit decision. After all, those could be put 
in the release notes.

Aleksey