Subject: Re: [boost] Lets do 1.70.1 WHO IS WITH ME!!!
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-05-05 03:49:05
On 5/4/19 8:00 PM, James E. King III via Boost wrote:
> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 10:39 PM Robert Ramey via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Perhaps this is a good opportunity to craft and test a procedure for a
>> single library update.
> Isn't this called "git pull" and build?
> If someone is going to take a patch of boost today, they can
> reasonably expect to have to build.
Right. That's all a single library update is. There might be a b2
headers or something, but that would require a version of b2, that the
user has to pull then compile that etc....
But it SHOULD be simple for any user to as downloading from github one
particular library into one's source tree and if library is header only
just rebuild his project. It should be about 2 minutes.
BUT, since we we don't have the the header structure the same in github
as we have in one the user's disk, extra effort has to be made. This is
what we somehow have to address.
> What other little fixes are going to get slipped into 1.70.1? Surely
> there are other candidates too.
So boost 1.70.1 is a bad idea. Just focust on boost 1.71
> I haven't seen a comprehensive plan put forth that would lead to
Right - that's what have haven't been able to reach a concensus on.
Actually, it's worse. We haven't been able to reach a concensus on how
to reach a concensus on this.
> Wouldn't that have to start with selection of a
> package manager capable of dealing with the versioning requirements
> and pre-built dependency acquisition?
In Vinnie's case, all that is done' He's per-determined that
downloading a patch to any boost 1.70 installation is guarenteed to work.
For example ...
Right - but that example is not what I'm addressing here. I'm
addressing Vinnie's case. And of course other cases the future because
... there is always someone.
> Until then, we have 3 releases a year, which is really quite good for
> something this complex.
Right - I don't see that changing for quite a while.
BTW - I want to explicitly acknowledge the tremendous work you've done
on making big improvements in Boost library quality.
> - Jim
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk