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.
-- 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