From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-06-27 12:28:21
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:20040627153020.M97518_at_crystalclearsoftware.com...
| On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 08:53:29 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
| > I'd like to know the reasons for "all the sudden rush". We did
| I agree with Dave on this -- the release was advertised ages ago. As much as
| I'd like to see circular_buffer, serialization, etc in this release I'd rather
| see us pull off a release that doesn't take 2-3 months to accomplish.
Understandable. I'm just asking so I know if I should use some time
in my vacation or not. If there is no extra week, I see no reason for doing those preparations.
| > announce a schedule long ago, and it has already been delayed by
| > three weeks. I'm not asking in order to point fingers; I just want
| > to know how to avoid the "sudden rush" next time. How come we have
| > so many accepted libraries that have not even been put in the CVS?
| The other thing that seems to be a
| pattern is that libraries get accepted, then authors get a list of changes to
| make. If they get busy it often takes months to get these done and then
| finally they check into CVS. So a release tends to trigger the evaluation of
| anything that is in that multi-month pipeline.
At least in my case that has been the situation. I'm the one to blame for not getting a post-review out sooner, but
I never really seemed to have the weekend that it would take to do so. Then exams hit, and soon I'm moving
back home and travelling a bit.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk