From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-13 04:38:13
Thomas Witt wrote:
> I'll comment on the actual proposal later.
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> I propose changing to a different release model, one based on always
>> maintaining a release-ready stable branch and merging updates for
>> individual libraries into it asynchronously.
> Just a quick remark. AFAICS the current release process is slowed down
> by the switch to boost.build v2 and I am perfectly willing to take the
> blame for that. The boost.build guys are working hard, some things just
> take time.
as I already mention in reply to Jeff, it does not seem that way for me.
During V2 switch I've address tens of issues that originally were present.
At the same time, regressions in concept_check and mpl, on *all* compilers,
that I reported to this list and to you personally are still there.
I did suggested to you to setup an issue tracker specifically for listing
all issues that must be addressed before release. It would allow anybody to
understand the state of release process.
Do you still think it's a bad idea? I can create the tracker in 5 mins.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk