"Joel de Guzman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The arrangement is basically based on trust while I control and sort-of
> police Spirit's core. This arrangement might not be acceptable to boost
> once Spirit is checked in its CVS. What might be a nice strategy is to
> continue with the current Spirit-CVS as a sandbox where ideas and
> prototypes are developed while more stable snapshots are sent of to
> Boost's CVS.
>
> Thoughts?
I worry a little about this arrangement. I don't want to slow down
Spirit development, but it seems likely that fixes will sometimes want
to be committed to the Boost CVS by Boost developers (say, when a
backwards-incompatible change in another library breaks some part of
Spirit). Maybe we should just give all of your core developers CVS
access to Boost...?
-Dave
--
David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
