Subject: Re: [boost] boost serialization backwardscompatibility ofbinary archives broken
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-21 18:24:36
Markus Henschel wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of
>> Sent: Donnerstag, 21. Februar 2013 17:36
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [boost] boost serialization backwards compatibility
>> ofbinary archives broken
>> Markus Henschel wrote:
>>> But what I find
>>> strange is that you leave the bug reports open. If you have the
>>> impression they cannot be fixed you could have just closed them
>>> with a comment in there that nothing can be done.
>> I left them open because I really wasn't sure what to say about them.
>> One thing I left out in my original answer was that I tried to
>> address this and it sort of made things worse. That is, when I
>> "fixed" one case - another case broke. It was whack-a-mole.
>> Sometimes the reporter isn't convinced by my answer and re-opens the
>> report after I closed it. In order to avoid a war of
>> closing/re-opening I just leave them open.
>> Robert Ramey
>>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> You didn't comment any part of my mail that proposed a fix for
> compatibility of archives prior to 1.42. Does that mean that you
> consider this issue solved or will you look into that later?
Actually I'm afraid to touch it. But I'm willing to take a look at it.
Maybe you should add your patch and email (and maybe my
response) as a comment to one of the trac items which touch
upon this subject. Another benefit of this - and another reason
that I left the items open is that other people how had variations
on this problem will get notified when you append to the trac
item and that might also be helpful.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk