Subject: Re: [boost] Deprecation Policy
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-16 17:26:29
On May 16, 2015 2:29 PM, "Rob Stewart" <rob.stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Some Boost libraries are unmaintained, some are under-maintained, and
others have been replaced by newer libraries or by the Standard Library.
Boost needs to decide whether to deprecate such libraries, and if so, how
and when to do it.
> Please consider my initial thoughts below and provide ideas on such a
policy. I will try to capture your ideas and create a policy statement for
> It would seem obvious that unmaintained libraries should be deprecated,
but a library that works, even if it has some known bugs, doesn't grow
worse over time. Thus, if an unmaintained library was included in one Boost
release, continuing to include it is no worse than before. That implies
that deprecating Unmaintained libraries is not a given.
I think the entire question becomes moot if individual libraries start
following their own release schedule. Being maintained then means having
regular releases (and thus over time it becomes obvious whether a library
is maintained or not).
I strongly believe that this is the best way forward, both for the Boost
organization as well as individual libraries.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk