Subject: Re: [boost] [trac] Boost v1.64 in the milestones?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-12-17 12:44:36
On 12/17/16 5:08 AM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> On 17.12.2016 05:34, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
>> Le 16/12/2016 à 21:21, Stefan Seefeld a écrit :
>>> On 16.12.2016 15:07, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> Since 1.63 is (almost) out, would it be possible to have 1.64 in the
>>>> milestones of trac?
>>> Wouldn't it be better to use the appropriate github issue tracker for
>>> this ?
>> I am totally fine with trac TBH.
> I believe you, but that's not the point ! :-)
> We have migrated our repositories to github, so we should use the
> *integrated* tools, rather than dispersing ourselves onto a lot of
> different infrastructure, which only increases the work and is prone of
> content getting out-of-sync. (As a point in case: look at the state of
> the (trac) wiki, which still refers to the svn->git migration as a
> future project.)
> If it was up to me I would establish a deadline for shutting down the
> entire svn.boost.org site and then work hard to migrate the remaining
> useful bits over to github.com/boostorg.
Personally, I see no reason why all libraries have to use the same
system. Enforcing this would create a huge amount of work with no real
benefit. I don't see any problem in letting the library
author/maintainer decide which he want's to use. After all, he is the
person who has to deal with it.
Don't worry about Trac/wiki containing a lot of old irrelevant stuff.
Www.Boost.org does as well. And given time, github will too.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk