From: AlisdairM (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-31 07:31:20
Martin Bonner wrote:
> I think you misunderstood what Alisdair said. He offered to help
> REMOVE support for old borland compilers in new boost releases. The
> suggestion is that 1.34 supports the latest Borland compiler, but is
> not cluttered with workrounds for previous Borland compilers. This
> seems like a good compromise to me.
Precisely, although I fear that will not remove too many :(
I am also in favour of '1 deprecated release' before removing support
entirely, just to put users on notice. That is a separate issue
though, and affects VC6/gcc2.95 just as much.
There also remains the issue of test resources. If we have no-one
regression testing a compiler, it de-facto loses active support so it
is up to the interested community to provide support.
To that end, I am trying to get the latest Borland compiler to metacomm
to continue testing (with the resources they so generously provide -
MUCH appreciated over the years) and working on the set of BCB2006
patches. I am reluctant to commit said patches until:
i/ There are regular regression runs available for both old and new
ii/ I have a complete set of fixes, rather than coming back and
committing a new patch-a-day.
Obviously, if consensus is to drop BCB6 support in the 1.34 release, I
only need a regular regression runner for the new compiler. I am
looking at what I can do to fill that role myself, but ideally I would
prefer to see someone elses PC testing the patches I propose, just in
case there are any local config issues.
I am certainly prepared to step in as a BCB2006 regression runner for
the 1.34 release if that is what is needed.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk