From: Martin Bonner (martin.bonner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-24 08:21:12
>> Martin Bonner <martin.bonner_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> Is it being suggested that "adding backwards compatibility" is a new
>>> feature, as opposed to fixing a bug?
>>> I think it will be /enormously/ damaging to Boost's reputation for
>>> professional quality software if it is not possible to read a 1.32
>>> archive with 1.33. It doesn't take long to build a reputation for
>>> "you can never read a file from old versions", and FOREVER to get
>>> rid of it.
> On May 24, 2005, at 6:45 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
>> Yeah, I think this probably falls under "bug fixing," or at least
>> "critical feature without which we had better not ship."
Douglas Gregor [mailto:doug.gregor_at_[hidden]] writes:
> Yes, it's a bug. I've already given Robert the go-ahead to fix it for
Thanks Doug. I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you for the job you
are doing managing this release. I think you've made the right decision
here, and I think you made the right decision on BOOST_FOREACH (even if I
would have loved to see that in 1.33).
-- Martin Bonner Martin.Bonner_at_[hidden] Pi Technology, Milton Hall, Ely Road, Milton, Cambridge, CB4 6WZ, ENGLAND Tel: +44 (0)1223 441434
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk