Subject: Re: [boost] Core libraries should separated from experimental libraries
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-22 15:06:32
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Wait. You'd like to have releases bundle both, and you don't want to
> provide distinct guarantees. What's the point in this split, then ?
1) To make the life of package maintainers (e.g. debian, ubuntu) easier.
2) To make adoption of boost in corporate environments easier, by offering the option to only use the "core" package, potentially cherry-picking only a few of the other libraries from the "complete" package.
3) Have a first step in the direction you want to go, but sufficiently similar to the existing release mode that it may still be possible to reach agreement.
4) Guarantees and what actually works are two different things. Even now, Boost.MPI and Boost.Phyton are probably tested on fewer systems than other Boost libraries without external dependencies. But with respect to your question, the "core" packages would probably actually be quite stable, but without an explicit guarantee for this.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk