Boost logo

Boost :

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-09 11:30:56


Daniel Frey wrote:

> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>
>> Daniel Frey wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW, I like the release-frequency as it is. Few but well tested
>>> releases are what users need, see GCC or XFree86. "Release early,
>>> release often" is only good in the beginning, but there is another
>>> mantra: "Release when it's ready for release - not when your
>>> marketing department wants to".
>>
>>
>> Of course. Spirit does not have a marketing department. We do release
>> when it's ready for release. It just so happens that the cycle is
>> more frequent than boost's.
>
>
> I see your point, but I guess that it might change in the future when
> Spirit becomes more and more stable, right?

Nice point. I think I agree. If that's the case, isn't it advantageous
then that younger (less stable) boost sub-libraries have a more frequent
release cycle? What if, in addition to a standard boost release, we have
individual, smaller module/library releases? A user may pick up an
individual release or simply wait for the next full boost release.

Cheers,

-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk