Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-27 05:06:03

> My real question was what is the downside of including MPL in release 1.33
> rather than 1.32 ? The important thing is the release date - not the
> release number. I believe that the rest of concentrating on a bug free
> release of 1.32 while others get MPL ready for the NEXT release will
> in a sooner release date for the current library + MPL than otherwise. So
> my suggestion is:
> Branch 1.32 rc now - make only bug fixes. Actually at this point they
> aren't really bugs so much as accommodation to different platforms, tool
> configuration scripts. Etc.

Normally that would work, but since the next MPL *has* to be released inside
the next month (for the book deadline), there is no way we can get two
releases out in that time IMO.

I think we're just going to have to patient for a week or two.

> I didn't not think that I would be able to make the release for the
> serialization library - indeed - I couldn't make the original one. I was
> prepared to work at my own pace and upload a "serialization add-in"
> compatible with the latest release. It would be then up to the manager of
> the next to decide whether it was worthy to be included in the next "boost
> release"
> Actually, all boost libraries - including an MPL update, should take this
> approach.

Ideally yes, I think the next release should be schedule-based rather than
feature based; this release and the lat one were essentially delayed because
they were feature based and sometimes things just take longer than you
expect :-(


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at