From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-09 10:51:49
Joel de Guzman <joel_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Mine are: avoid that problem by releasing as part of the boost
>> release. That's what branch-for-release is all about.
> Fine. And that's what we are doing right now. However, it just so
> happens that Spirit has a more frequent release cycle with 2
> concurrent releases (odd minor version: developmental and even
> minor version: stable). Are you saying that we abandon that and
> follow the boost release cycle?
Maybe. Or you could do it with branches in the Boost CVS repository.
Even if that doesn't work for you, what we have now is a very unusual
arrangement among Boost libraries and so I wouldn't like to make any
general decisions about Boost release policy based solely on what
works for Spirit.
> Again, please don't get me wrong. I'm just asking for opinions.
> Is a single monolithic release a better solution? Is it not a
> good idea for sub-libraries, such as Spirit, to have its own
> release cycle?
I don't know. Is there any good reason to do it? What are the pros
and cons? Heh, I see you asking that below.
> Can't we have both?
Sounds very complicated, but if you can figure out a way to make it
less painful, maybe it will work.
> What are the pros and cons?
-- 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