[boost] Re: Library versioning

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-21 14:43:16

At 10:26 AM 12/21/99 -0600, Bill Wade wrote:

>Finally I don't believe boost needs to be nearly as "stable" as the
standard
>library.  I would hope that boost changes several times a year, and
I'm not
>bothered too much when some of those changes aren't backward
compatible.
>The standard library will not have significant changes more than
once a
>decade, and almost all of those should preserve compatibility.  The
theory
>is that stuff won't make it into the standard until it has survived
>substantial real-world abuse.  The bar should not be that high for
boost.

Agreed.  I will start to used Dave Abrahams' suggested version
numbering scheme, but let's leave it at that for now.

> xxx.yyy.zzz
> xxx = Major version
> yyy = New library or feature added
> zzz = Bug fixes only

Maybe I will start numbering January 1st, beginning with 2.00.00 :-)

--Beman