From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-03 00:20:21
Jeff Garland wrote
>Just so you know, the compile blows up with the CVS as of about a day ago.
>I'm sure not your fault, but so you know...
Well, as you can imagine, I'm happy to know that.
At times during this development I used the development tree and other times
I used the latest release. Basically I use the latest release rather until
I need something that is only in the development tree. This happened with
new iterators and mpl. When the release candidated 1.31 came out I switched
back to that.
My motivation for preferring the latest release is that I would like to
upload something that I can expect to work and other people can test with a
minimum amount of hassle. I'm mean I have enough problems with my own
flakey ( er.. experimental) code with out adding in everyone else's.
So as things stand now I'm inclined to work to the 1.31.0 .
Having said that, it seems to me the development tree is considered
"experimental" where as I would prefer that it be considered "Candidate for
Release" That is, I think code is uploaded without out being fully tested in
one's local environment. I think this creates a chain reaction at release
time. Its not that I think anyone is really wrong, just that I think things
would be better if developer's were a little more conservative. (But then,
I'm getting old, I think that about everybody)
In this case presumable something in new iterators has changed and caught me
with my pants down (for the second time !). Oh well. I'll worry about it if
we ever get to incorporating the library in a release.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk