Boost logo

Boost :

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-30 12:57:57

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Eric Niebler wrote:
>> In the mean time, corporate users of Boost have a few options: (1)
>> ignore hotfixes, (2) pay for support, (3) consider donating the testing
>> resources we would need to produce point releases.
> As I've already said, those "hotfixes" presently appear to be *totally untested*.

They are tested in trunk, which hasn't yet diverged significantly from
the 1.36 release.

> I'd be happy to be proved wrong -- just point me at a tables of test results
> for 1.36.0 + hotfixes and I'll shut up.

You're right, no such testing is done officially. It is the
responsibility of each developer to test their hotfix with the release
locally before posting it, but that is not enforced.

> But if hotfixes are indeed untested,
> then I don't understand why creating 1.36.1, which is basically 1.36.0 +
> hotfixes in a single archive, would require *any testing resources at all*.
> Can you clarify?

You raise a fair point. My feeling is we couldn't in good faith issue an
official point release without testing it. Hotfixes aren't (yet)
official Boost releases and so meet a different criteria. That's a weak
justification, but considering that we have limited resources, it seems
like a good-faith effort to quickly get fixes into hands of users that
need them.

Perhaps we need a bold disclaimer stating that hotfixes are not official
Boost releases and that buyer beware.

Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at