Subject: Re: [boost] Review Queue Needs Attention
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-26 05:09:34
>>> (And a state not damned with faint praise like 'unstable' - which is perhaps
>>> better described as 'likely_to_be_improved' rather than actively 'not stable').
> The apache incubator might be a more appropriate inspiration than
> Debian unstable.
the current sandbox layout has the disadvantage, that single projects
are present as sandbox/mylib, which do not run or compile on their own,
but require a full set of the boost headers. in order to try out one
sandbox library, you need to get the boost checkout/tarball and copy it
to sandbox/mylib or vice versa ...
it would be nice to have an `integrated' sandbox repository, though,
which especially would help when synchronizing the development of
libraries (e.g. boost.lockfree and boost.atomic). the linux kernel
development has trees like linux-next or tip, which focus on bringing
the sources together instead of keeping them apart (as in the current
for me personally, the boost sandbox does not help when working on code,
but only when distributing the code ...
-- tim_at_[hidden] http://tim.klingt.org Linux is like a wigwam: no windows, no gates, apache inside, stable.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk