Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At 11:50 AM 7/15/2003, David Abrahams wrote: > >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? > > No, of course not. There is only one new library ready for > 1.31.0. We've essentially been working on 1.31.0 for several months. A > huge amount of effort has gone into finding and fixing bugs. The > iterator adaptor changes have temporarily obscured the progress, but > it is there nonetheless. > > > Also, AFAICT 1.30.1 can go out much, much sooner. > > Hum... You must be seeing some way of getting a 1.30.1 release out > that eludes me. What would go into 1.30.1?
Exactly what's on the end of the RC_1_30_0 branch plus whatever additional small fixes were deemed important and can be applied in a day or two; release to happen in a week. > There have probably been hundreds of changes to CVS since the 1.30.0 > tag. How would we distinguish what should or should not be merged > into a 1.30.1 branch? Only *critical* fixes to the 1.30.0 release. > Who will make the decisions? Individual library developers. > Who will do the testing? Whoever does testing for any release? > Who will act as release manager? I guess I'd have to reluctantly volunteer, now that I've suggested it. > How will we prevent a 1.30.1 release from delaying a 1.31.0 release? By releasing one week from now? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
