Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 10:26 AM 7/15/2003, David Abrahams wrote: > > >Dominique Devriese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>> In general, they are released when all of Boost is ready. I think > >>> it would be a *really* good idea for Boost to do at least one minor > >>> version release shortly after any major version release. Now that > >>> we have a reasonable testing strategy it should be relatively easy. > >>> Boost 1.30.0 went out with several bugs IIRC. > >> > >>> Until we get our act together, I would suggest you supply people > >>> with a Boost patch. Use "BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME" instead of > >>> "typename" so you don't break VC6. Sorry, > >> > >> A fixed release would be great indeed. In the mean time, I'm going to > >> provide the patch as you suggest, although it's far from a perfect > >> solution of course.. > > > >What does everybody think about doing a 1.30.1 release "RSN?" > > What would be the advantage of doing a 1.30.1 release rather than a > 1.31.0 release?
When we released 1.30.0, despite extensive pre-release testing, it went out with several prominent showstopper bugs. Don't you think we'll make the same mistake for 1.31.0? Also, AFAICT 1.30.1 can go out much, much sooner. > Seems like we are very close to being ready to do a 1.31.0 > release. One new library has been added since 1.30.0, at least two > libraries have had interface upgrades, and a large number of bugs > have been fixed in numerous libraries. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
