Subject: Re: [boost] Deprecation Policy
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-18 18:33:55
On 18/05/15 01:13 AM, Brian Ravnsgaard Riis wrote:
> Den 16-05-2015 kl. 23:26 skrev Stefan Seefeld:
>> 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
>> is maintained or not).
> This might suggest that an old library gets removed from the boost
> release, even though it may be a small piece that Just Works. I
> believe that was one of Rob's bullets as well.
> Or did I misunderstand you?
Yes, because I'm not suggesting to remove anything. A library that
doesn't get updated simply stays at the last release. Of course, if we
move to a modular model where a "full boost" release would be superseded
by a small "boost core" release and many separate boost library
releases, we'd have to do one other release of the above, so it remains
My assumption really was that a library could remain useful even
without any update, and the release date will indicate when it was last
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk