Subject: Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-22 12:44:50
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 8:41 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite
> If anything needs to be released today, we can upgrade release branch to the trunk version of
> docs. This version addresses most of outstanding issues with errors in content.
> > Forcing a delay in adopting what has already been done in order to
> > document new features doesn't seem to benefit anyone.
> Forcing users to adopt to one version only to be replaced by something else soon does not look
> beneficial as well.
To reiterate my previous (unchanged) views.
Making any change to the existing release of Boost.Test at this time is extremely unhelpful. We
(speaking for myself at least) are struggling to get to grips with modularization and GIT.
Let's freeze the current release, warts and all, at Boost.Test and add Richard's much improved
documentation to the release alongside your existing docs, leaving users to choose which docs they
I believe it is very important to avoid any disruption caused by changes to Boost.Test.
Then let's start again with new proposals for Boost.Test2.
You can propose your current develop version for Boost.Test2 - but it will need very much improved
Others can produce their own version(s), perhaps a slimmed down (faster to compile) header-only
Then we will have a full review of all the proposals.
Other library developers can then choose if and when to switch.
--- Paul A. Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB UK +44 1539 561830 07714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk