Re: [boost] on boost version numbers

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-08 00:58:31

Thomas Witt <witt_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Dave,
>
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Thomas Witt <witt_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> 
>>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>>> I'm all for dropping the leading 1.
>>> Yes it is meaningless, but is it worth the effort? Personally I don't 
>>> think so, we have bigger fish to fry.
>> 
>> I don't think it takes any significant effort at all to name the next
>> release 34.0 instead of 1.34.0
>> 
>
> I think you are underestimating the effort. There is QA, i.e. finding 
> all the places the version number is used. 

Why would anyone need to do that?  Are people depending on Boost
version numbers being strictly sequential?

> I don't even want to think 
> about library naming schemes and such. Then as mentioned earlier the 
> change has to be communicated to users with respect to rationale and 
> what it means. What is kind of related is the ripple effect for users. 
> See Olivers post with respect to this. This applies to communication 
> too. Think about telling management/legal department you want to move 
> from 1.33 to 34.0 if that does not draw questions I don't know what will.
>
> That being said, after thinking about it for a while I have to say I am 
> not really ready to give up on the major version number. If we ever get 
> around modularizing boost this might justify calling it 2.x.

I don't care much about this issue at all, FWIW.  I'm just curious, is all.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com