Re: [boost] [1.38.0] beta release candidate

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.38.0] beta release candidate
From: Daniel James (daniel_james_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-27 17:17:48

2009/1/27 vicente.botet <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>:
>
> 1. The page  http://beta.boost.org/doc/libs/ allowing to show some Boost library has not been merged.

Sorry, I'm unlikely to develop anything new for the website soon, as
my priority has to be documenting the documentation tools (which is
well overdue). I don't think we have anything which tracks when a
library is merged to release. The best source of information is the
review schedule page, but that only tracks when a library is added to
trunk, and when it's released. And I don't think how up to date it is.

http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html

> 2. The documentation for the new scoped_exit library is not included yet

Thanks, I didn't realise it was in the release branch, I'm working on it.

> 3. The release is missing
> The page https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/browser/website/public_html/beta/feed/history/boost_1_38_0.qbk contains already some items, but not all.

Yep, it's not finished.

> Between the library that have been modified some of them contains already an history on its documentation. For these we should at least add an item with "For more detail, see the [@ ...
>
> * DateTime Changes from Boost 1.34 to 1.38 (date_time 1.05 to 1.06)
> * Interprocess Boost 1.38 Release
> * Intrusive Boost 1.38 Release
> * MultiIndex Boost 1.38 release
> * RegEx Boost 1.38

That's up to the library authors. Although, I suppose we could store a
list of changelogs somewhere, which I could use to start the release
notes.

> Is there a systematic way to know which libraries have made some changes?

It takes a bit work to interpret the output:

svn diff --summarize
http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/tags/release/Boost_1_37_0
http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/branches/release

There are quite a lot of irrelevant changes - for example I fixed a
lot of subversion file properties, which isn't really worth noting.

Daniel

Daniel