Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Release numbering
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-16 14:08:45

On 16 Dec 2013 at 8:26, Peter A. Bigot wrote:

> A change to the major version number of a software system should
> indicate a significant increase in value to the user. Though it impacts
> developers, a management decision to use a new SCM tool should be all
> but invisible to Boost's users, and does not warrant an exceptional
> version number change.

Thing is, one of the most often requested "features" for Boost is
modularisation. I personally think a 2.0 release should be seriously
breaking, with lots of libraries explicitly *removed* from a 2.0
release, but I can see the point of those thinking that mere
modularisation is enough for a 2.0.

I like a v1.9 release though. It implies "last iteration of the C++98
compatible Boost".


Currently unemployed and looking for work.
Work Portfolio:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at