Re: [boost] [1.43][beta] Fix for MPL under gcc 4.5

Subject: Re: [boost] [1.43][beta] Fix for MPL under gcc 4.5
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-22 04:10:30

On 22 April 2010 04:43, Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 06:30:21 -0500, Daniel James <dnljms_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> The beta cycle is more about fixing regressions caused by changes to
>> boost, rather than existing problems or problems caused by external
>> changes. But the real problem here is that no one has accepted the
>> ticket. If the library was actively maintained, then IMO this would be
>> fine (after testing, naturally).
>
> I've seen the ticket, but the scope/urgency of the issue (show stopper for
> Fusion and Xpressive) wasn't apparent to me from the ticket's description.

Just to put what I wrote in context, I've sent a few mails to this
list in the past suggesting that we should take greater group
ownership, rather than relying on individual maintainers to deal with
a library's issues. It wasn't my intent to criticise you for not
actively maintaining MPL. I think I might sound too negative about
this, there seems to be more people taking on these issues over the
past year or so.

> My experience as a release manager (admittedly from a long time ago) was
> that release-critical issues will slip past even the most active library
> maintainers, and letting them know about it (and occasionally nagging)
> goes a long way towards "all green" release.

The release process is quite different now. It seems to me that the
focus is to get a regular release with the more modest goal of being
an incremental improvement, rather than an 'all green' release. If
there is a bug that goes unfixed, it can be fixed three months later,
which is not that long and quicker than you'd wait for some of the old
releases to be finished. If no one's fixing it, and someone cares
about it, it's their responsibility to make sure it gets fixed. This
reduces the burden on the release managers, which was too high in the
old system. For all its faults, the new system feels like an
improvement to me. (It's hopefully clear that this is all my opinion,
not policy).

Daniel