From: AlisdairM (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-25 04:53:49
Thomas Witt wrote:
> For that reason I am going to aim for a feature freeze (Stage 3) in
> two weeks from now.
Does that imply we are in 'stage 2' now, or are we jumping straight
from 1 -> 3?
> Stage 2 - Intracomponent Open Development
> ... However, the changes must be limited in scope and may not have
> far-reaching affects. For instance, the build or regression testing
> systems in Boost cannot be changed at this point ...
I ask, because there was recent discussion on the boost.build lists
about moving to v2 for the next release, and if we are already stage 2
it would seem too to make such a change.
At the least, I think the build maintainers and regression testers need
to make a decision on this fast if we are heading back into release
Will Boost 1.34 be based on boost build v1 or boost build v2?
Second contentious issue: deprecations.
We have already used a deprecation mechanism for warning about and
later removing libraries. There has been some recent discussion about
stopping support for old compilers. This is a topic that is not going
to go away until resolved, and I think we were getting close to some
agreement (if not on which platforms should go!)
I suggest we formally deprecate VC6, GCC prior to 3, and have a
bun-fight over Borland support. This would ammount to adding the
deprecation notice to the release notes, a #pragma warning to the
compiler config.hpp, but full support through this release as before.
We can argue about what the consequence of deprecation should be for
the next release.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk