From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-23 07:11:11
Have you tried to merge to the release branch already. I have see that units
and accumulators have been added recently.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Emil Dotchevski" <emil_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2008 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] [1.36.0] Release schedule set
> I am following the traffic on this mailing list yet the first time I
> noticed anything about releasing 1.36 it was the message informing me
> that technically I'm late to merge Boost Exception into the release
> branch. Maybe I have missed an earlier message but I think we should
> be getting more reminders here.
> Emil Dotchevski
> Reverge Studios, Inc.
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 6:14 PM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> James Sharpe wrote:
>>> You see its this lack of flexibility and clarity that naming a branch
>>> release brings. I refer you to my earlier suggestion of including the
>>> release number in the branch name to remove ambiguity and make it
>>> easier to create for example 1.35.1 whilst release 1.36.0 is in
>>> progress since it is clear where fixes should go.
>> I agree with this suggestion. Naming the branch "release" does seem a
>> bit like needless invention where an industry-standard practice would do
>> the job better. Am I missing something?
>> Dave Abrahams
>> BoostPro Computing
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk