Re: [boost] Release procedure. Where do we go?

From: Roland Schwarz (roland.schwarz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-04 04:52:25

David Abrahams wrote:
> on Mon Sep 03 2007, Roland Schwarz wrote:
>> Btw.: You didn't respond to my comment about modularization (ala. CPAN) 
>> vs. monolithic (ala. Linux Kernel). 
> 
> I haven't noticed such a comment, even upon rereading your message.
> But my initial reply was only responding to the top half of your
> message.  I hadn't read the whole thing at that point.

Re-citing the part I was refering to:
> AFAIK this is also the model other big monolithic projects are using.
> Departing from it would require modularization of the boost library, 
> which at the current state does not look like an easy task to me.
> A small example:
> I was trying to single out the asio lib, and discovered that it had 
> quite some implicit (undocumented) dependencies on other 
> header-only/prebuilt libs. Only when I tried to use auto_link on an msvc 
> platform with BOOST_LIB_DIAGNOSTIC turned on I eventually figured out 
> that I also had to provide boost_system boost_date_time and boost_regex 
> to the linker while compiling with gcc. So the recipe I once heard on 
> this list: just take the relevant files and copy to your directory if 
> you don't need all of boost, is hoping at best.
> 

Hmm, perhaps I shouldn't have posted at all?

Who is in the position to give the answers to my pragmatic questions?

> 1) What should developers do until the new procedures are established?
>     Should they try to stabilize branch ?
>     Should they merge new code from trunk to RC_1_34_0 ?
> 
> 2) Bug Fixes for 1.34.1
>     Where should they go?
>     RC_1_34_0 ?

Roland aka speedsnail