Subject: Re: [boost] Review Queue Needs Attention
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-25 11:40:35
Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> What's the difference between a non-stable branch as you're suggesting and
> the existing sandbox? The only difference I could see is to establish some
> kind of pre-review process. But that would just move the problem to a
> different spot, no?
To my mind, there are two key differences:
1. The sandbox does not have a release cycle. There are no sandbox
2. Somewhat connected to #1. The sandbox is not tested regularly and
widely. The most testing level we can expect is local testing by the
library authors and enthusiast users.
These two key drawbacks has always prevented me from using anything from
sandbox in real world applications.
If Boost does release a non-stable branch, it should receive at least
periodical testing on key compilers and a release cycle (be that the
same cycle that core Boost libraries have or not). Otherwise I don't see
much sense in it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk