Beman Dawes wrote: > > At 08:06 AM 3/19/2003, Alisdair Meredith wrote: > > >Russell Hind wrote: > >> > >> Does anybody know if this needs fixing, or is it my mistake. If it > >> needs fixing, is someone able to do it before 1.30.0 is released? > > > >Yes, I think it needs fixing! > > Unless others disagree strongly, this should be held for the next release. > > I don't want to make last minute changes, particularly without the > maintainer's OK. > > We really need to discuss procedures for handling patches; too many are > getting delayed unnecessarily, and I'm afraid some are dropped on the floor > and missed entirely. > > So please have patience while we finish this release.
I don't know how close the release schedule is now, but if we could at least change the version check from 0x0561 to 0x0564 that would be extrely useful. This would make the difference between our being able to use boost 1_30 'out-the-box' (as I half-promised our deparment) and having to apply in-house patches again. I am currently doing a search for other places where borland v 0x0561 is assumed, as I don't think the latest patch fixed any issues that would affect boost and it would be a shame to have to choose between boost and the patch. (especially as Samuel put so much effort into getting this version to be Borland compatible! I have mailed him separately off-list in case he is not actively monitoring right now, but I know release is close) -- AlisdairM _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
