Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-06 Thread Olaf van der Spek
Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 15:50 schreef Giovanni Mascellani : > > Il 06/11/18 15:23, Olaf van der Spek ha scritto: > > Just 1.68 contains plenty of improvements: > > https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_68_0.html > > Each new version hopefully contains many improvements, but this does not >

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-06 Thread Giovanni Mascellani
Il 06/11/18 15:23, Olaf van der Spek ha scritto: > Just 1.68 contains plenty of improvements: > https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_68_0.html Each new version hopefully contains many improvements, but this does not make it MUCH better than the one before. Buster will be available for

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-06 Thread Olaf van der Spek
Op di 6 nov. 2018 om 15:17 schreef Giovanni Mascellani : > > A beta is scheduled for November 14th, so preparations could start > > sooner. > > This easily means having to do at least part of the work twice. Unless > there are strong motivations for which 1.69 is MUCH better than 1.67, it > might

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-06 Thread Giovanni Mascellani
Hi. Il 05/11/18 10:00, Olaf van der Spek ha scritto: > What's holding up 1.67? The usual stuff: other transitions, fixing bugs, testing builds, maintainers having other things to do with their life. Nothing specifically, but things can take some time. > A beta is scheduled for November 14th, so

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-05 Thread Olaf van der Spek
Op ma 5 nov. 2018 om 09:50 schreef Giovanni Mascellani : > I don't know, for the moment. First of all, we have to finish > transitioning to 1.67, which is already proving rather long, and What's holding up 1.67? > possibly getting rid of 1.62 (we can in theory ship more than a version > in the

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-05 Thread Giovanni Mascellani
Hi, Il 05/11/18 09:28, Olaf van der Spek ha scritto: > Source: boost1.67 > Severity: wishlist > > Dear Maintainer, > > What's the plan for Buster? 1.67, 1.68 or 1.69? > 1.69 would be nice. ;) I don't know, for the moment. First of all, we have to finish transitioning to 1.67, which is already

Bug#912948: boost1.67: 1.68 or 1.69?

2018-11-05 Thread Olaf van der Spek
Source: boost1.67 Severity: wishlist Dear Maintainer, What's the plan for Buster? 1.67, 1.68 or 1.69? 1.69 would be nice. ;) Gr, Olaf -- System Information: Debian Release: buster/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)