On 08/31/2012 12:52 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
On 08/31/12 14:15, Stefan Teleman wrote:
My understanding is that 4.2.x and 4.3.x are bugfix/rfe releases while
5.x would become C++2011.
There is an implicitly stated binary incompatibilit
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
> On 08/31/12 14:15, Stefan Teleman wrote:
>>
>>
>> My understanding is that 4.2.x and 4.3.x are bugfix/rfe releases while
>> 5.x would become C++2011.
>
>
> There is an implicitly stated binary incompatibility between 4.2 and 4.3.
> Are you pr
On 08/31/12 14:15, Stefan Teleman wrote:
My understanding is that 4.2.x and 4.3.x are bugfix/rfe releases while
5.x would become C++2011.
There is an implicitly stated binary incompatibility between 4.2 and 4.3. Are
you privy to what prompted 4.3.x? I could look it up, I just didn't get that
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
> The branching policy [1] in effect looks very much like the Rogue Wave
> release process: branch at the beginning of each release cycle, work on the
> release branch, merge changes back into the trunk at release time (and in
> between as need
The branching policy [1] in effect looks very much like the Rogue Wave release
process: branch at the beginning of each release cycle, work on the release
branch, merge changes back into the trunk at release time (and in between as
needed). Did I get that right?
From what I gather 4.2.x has la
