>PS: Would it make sense to have a "boost bug bashing week" or something >to fix some more bugs/regressions? Or do we wait for users to complain >and provide fixes?
Until recently, figuring out which tests should pass for each compiler was difficult. Sometimes a problem was a compiler bug, sometimes a bug in boost code, and sometimes a configuration problem.
That is changing. On Win32 we now have several compilers which are good enough that either all tests should pass, or all tests should pass except for a very few where the compiler supplier has acknowledged a compiler bug.
So for the next release we can talk about explicit release criteria. Meeting those criteria will in effect be a "boost bug bashing week". It may go on for a bit longer than that, however:-)
But right now a lot of Boost developers are coping with interface changes in Boost.Random and iterator adaptors. We need to keep focused on those fixes until the dust starts to clear a bit.
--Beman
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
