Re: Do we still want develop branch?

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2023-11-12 15:22:23

On 11/11/23 5:29 PM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Robert Ramey wrote:

>> I can't see why one would ever want to do that.
> 
> Often because the feature has been developed at their request, and
> they don't want to wait for the next Boost release to take advantage
> of it.

They wouldn't have to wait until the next release.  Any such feature 
would be merged into the master as soon as it was done/ready.
> 
> This also works in the other direction, for features being deprecated
> and removed - fixing the deprecation warnings should be done
> sooner than later, 

As they would be under the new system.

> because our users aren't particularly impressed if
> our own libraries emit warnings because they use deprecated features
> of other Boost libraries.

Right.  Under the new system they would find out at the earliest 
possible time.

> For the user, Boost is a whole, 

That's an interesting perspective. I'm still attached to the "modular" 
boost idea where each library + it's dependencies stands (mostly) 
independent from the rest of boost.

and it should keep its house in order.
> 
which we're trying to do.  Broadening the concerns and responsibilities 
of each library developer to include all of boost doesn't scale and 
makes library development a lot harder.  This really is a disincentive 
to contribute to boost in the first place.

Robert Ramey
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>