Re: [boost] [BoostCon07][testing] Session reminder.

From: Michael Fawcett (michael.fawcett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-03 13:38:37

On 5/3/07, Anthony Williams <anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Here I don't understand. Suppose Boost release X contains library A version
> 1.4, and library B version 1.23, and library A depends on library B. The
> developer of library B then releases a new version (1.24), and the author of
> library A doesn't. The next Boost release (Y) comes along, and now library A
> is no longer part of the Boost release? That strikes me as a bad plan --- the
> contents of Boost will vary from release to release as developers update their
> libraries at different rates.
>
> As an alternative, how about this: if library A depends on version xyz of
> library B, then library B is pinned at version xyz for Boost releases until
> library A is updated. If library A is not updated for n consecutive Boost
> releases, library A is dropped from Boost as unmaintained.
>
> How about this, also: a library developer can only release their library if it
> is built against the latest released version of all its dependent
> libraries. That way if a core library is updated, all other libraries will
> have to use the new version before they can release.

Didn't Beman's proposal address most or all of these issues?

--Michael Fawcett