From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-08 09:58:05
Edward Diener wrote:
> From an end user's perspective I think it is really important, for a
> given release and library of Boost, to know whether or not a particular
> compiler is supposed to work for a particular library. The regression
> tests do not, unfortunately, always give the end user that information.
> While I understand the concern for getting out timely releases of Boost
> which are guaranteed to support a subset of highly conformant compilers,
> this way of doing things will only make it even more difficult for
> end-users of those compilers which are not part of that subset to
> determine whether the latest release of a particular Boost library is
> supported when using their compiler.
While I agree this might make understanding the status a tiny bit harder, it's
worth it for the majority of users to actually have access to the new
libraries that have been accepted into boost -- even if regression status is a
bit harder to understand. asio was reviewed in Jan of 2006 and if we don't
take some radical steps it won't be in a Boost release in 2007 -- almost 2
years later -- the current state of affairs is simply unacceptable.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk