Re: [Boost-users] [boost] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page

----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Ramey" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page

vicente.botet wrote:

...

----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Ramey" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page

...

I really think that *we can* achieve this goal.

I would say 'we COULD' achieve this goal - if there was a true desire to do so.

You don't belive that things COULD change?

...

...

Your "Maintainence Guidlines" presume a consensus about what should be acceptable practice where no such consensus actually exists.

Which acceptable practice are you referring to for which there is no consensus?

My view is that it is good practice to consider breaking an interface should be considered a bug.

Does your view accepts that exceptionally a well documented breaking change with a reasoable deprecated period could not be considered a bug?

The responses to the posting cited above, indicate to me that there is no consensus to support this view point.

You are right, there was no consensus at all respect to this point. May be we can reach a consensus in other points that can make Boost more backward compatible if not completly backward compatible. Do you think that the deprecation of a feature should be considered as a bug? If not how long should a reasonable period be for you? <snip> ...

...

Please could you participate in the elaboration of this guidelines,

Basically, the guidelines are fine Thanks. The guidelines for authors should be separated from those for users.

Yes, I could add an index by author, user, RM. Why not.

For users, "don't use "using" " could be part of a larger list of suggestions for getting the most benefit from the libraries.

I'm sure that you have think about it already. Could you share with us some of these suggestions? Thanks, Vicente