Subject: Re: [boost] Deprecation Policy
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-16 18:23:39
On May 16, 2015 4:26:29 PM CDT, Stefan Seefeld <stefan_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On May 16, 2015 2:29 PM, "Rob Stewart" <rob.stewart_at_[hidden]>
> > Some Boost libraries are unmaintained, some are under-maintained,
> others have been replaced by newer libraries or by the Standard
> Boost needs to decide whether to deprecate such libraries, and if so,
> and when to do it.
> > Please consider my initial thoughts below and provide ideas on such
> policy. I will try to capture your ideas and create a policy statement
> later review.
> I think the entire question becomes moot if individual libraries start
> following their own release schedule. Being maintained then means
> regular releases (and thus over time it becomes obvious whether a
> is maintained or not).
The goal is to offer both for the foreseeable future. (For example, the way my company handles Boost, the monolithic release is more appropriate.)
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk