Subject: Re: [boost] Libraries failing across the board.
From: Matthew Musto (matthew.musto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-07-11 14:00:48
Thank you, I understand. I guess I will have to wait for 1.57 or try to
merge in the development branch to my local 1.56 version as soon as it is
I realize we do not hold releases until all tests pass but I wonder if we
should do something like that for one release a year as a long term support
(LTS) version. It just makes relying upon boost very difficult from a end
user perspective when major development projects often times rely upon
multiple libraries. Would this be worth having a larger discussion about
in its own thread?
From: David Bellot <david.bellot <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Libraries failing across the board.
Date: 2014-07-11 11:36:24 GMT (2 hours and 7 minutes ago)
yes, I know it's not ideal but we haven't time to do better this time
I will try to update the devel branch on git if it helps
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Matthew Musto <matthew.musto <at> gmail.com>
> Just so I am clear, you are saying that 1.56 cannot be relied upon by users
> who need ublas as there is no intention of making it work?
> If that is true, this release is effectively worthless to me or anyone else
> who needs any other library in conjunction with ublas? For example, I rely
> heavily upon threads, serialization, asio and numeric/ublas. 1.55 did not
> compile on VS2013 and there was much hope for this release which now seems
> >Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:24:15 +0100
> >From: David Bellot <david.bellot <at> gmail.com>
> >To: "boost <at> lists.boost.org" <boost <at> lists.boost.org>
> >Subject: Re: [boost] Libraries failing across the board.
> > <CAOE6ZJGEhHEcujgXw4N2r=
> >DLsn3vhx9+qSc3eN=jdfPHNSUcJA <at> mail.gmail.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >for ublas we decided to skip this release and concentrate on 1.57 as we
> >have more patches coming.
> >- D
> >On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes <at> acm.org> wrote:
> >> Marshall is just a few days away from being able to put out a beta
> >> candidate. (And that is very good news!)
> >> But we still have too many libraries failing across the board on master:
> >> accumulators
> >> interprocess
> >> numeric/ublas
> >> pool
> >> proto
> >> spirit/repository
> >> spirit/test
> >> tr1
> >> wave
> >> See
> >> What is the hold up with these? Does anyone need help?
> >> --Beman
> 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