[boost] Re: Re: 1.32 release preparation

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?

[snip]

| 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.

br

Thorsten