Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-22 17:28:56

vicente.botet wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]>
> To: <boost-users_at_[hidden]>
> Cc: <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 9:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page
>
>
>>
>> This is a laudable effort,
>
> Thanks.
>
>> but my guess is that it's doomed to failure.
>>
>> My own take on this was posted in
>> http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2008/07/139893.php
>
> I remember your participation and your point of view on this long
> thread.
>
>> So far, no one else has endorsed such a pledge.  Indeed, the
>> responses suggested that the breaking interfaces was a normal, acceptable 
>> and unavoidable
>> practice.

> I don't think this is the case. Breaking changes should be
> exceptional and taken because there is no better solution. I think
> that most of the Boost authors respect that. As every rule this one
> has its exceptions, there has been some library evolution that have
> break user and even Boost library code. This is regretable and we
> need to setup whatever is needed to make this exceptions more than
> exceptional.

Well that's my view.  But my point is that its not as widely shared
as it I would hope.

> I really think that *we can* achieve this goal.

I would say 'we COULD' achieve this goal - if there was a
true desire to do so.

>> Your "Maintainence Guidlines" presume a consensus
>> about what should be acceptable practice where no
>> such consensus actually exists.
>
> Which acceptable practice are you referring to for which there is no
> consensus?

My view is that it is good practice to consider
breaking an interface should be considered a bug.

The responses to the posting cited above, indicate
to me that there is no consensus to support
this view point.

>> As a practical matter what do I do.

<snip> ...

> I hope that you are not proposing that to the end users. Are you?

I am.

Because they really have no other choice.

 It's not that I choose to do this, its that I feel I have no other choice.
I have projects out in the field which are in use after more than a decade.
 If I didn't do this, I would be spending all my time just keeping
things running and I can't do that.

> Please could you participate in the elaboration of this guidelines,

Basically, the guidelines are fine

The guidelines for authors should be separated from those
for users.

For users, "don't use "using" " could be part of a larger list
of suggestions for getting the most benefit from the libraries.

As I said, a laudable effort, I hope it helps.

Robert Ramey

> your opinion is very important to the Boost community.
LOL