Re: [boost] Should we provide hot fixes?

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-20 13:45:46

dherring_at_[hidden] wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Beman Dawes wrote:
> 
>> Although it does look like we will be able to hold to a quarterly
>> release schedule, it is really doubtful we have enough resources to
>> issue point releases.
>>
>> To get bug fixes into user's hands more quickly, should we provide hot
>> fixes when appropriate?
> 
> Yes and no.  Yes -- trivial bloopers shouldn't require a 3-month 
> turnaround.
> 
>>     -- Click on "Download in other formats: Unified Diff".
>>     -- From the command prompt,
>>             cd directory-location
>>             patch <download-location/changeset_r48192.diff
> 
> No -- this is too complex.  For any reasonably large project, 
> instructions beyond "install version 1.36" are generally ignored.  I've 
> already had the fun of helping distribute in-house tarballs for boost, 
> setting up my own tests, server, etc. so people wouldn't have to slurp 
> 1.35+ from SVN.
> 
> Much better would be if these "hotfixes" could be applied to the release 
> (and trunk) branches, tested against the usual mechanisms, and released 
> as a micro version number.  Then everyone gets the update from the main 
> boost servers.
> 
> Of course this puts more work on the release manager's shoulders,

And the testers, and those who admin the report servers, and those who 
review betas, etc.

If all you want is updated release packages, you can always download the 
nightly snapshots. Of course, your milage may vary.

--Beman