On Jun 4, 2007, at 2:01 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:
As a Boost user, I simply don't use Boost components whose HEAD versions are unstable.
Yep. One tends to learn this very, very quickly as a user of HEAD.
As a Boost developer, if a dependency takes too much time to stabilize, I sever ties with it and reimplement the parts I need. This is rare since I have low tolerance for dependencies anyway. :-)
Ha!
I understand that this mindset may be unusual. Still, I find the idea that the trunk is assumed to be unstable a bit odd. The trunk should be stable and everyone should work to keep it that way.
Yes. The problem is that the trunk becomes the Wild West when there is a release branch active, and it takes us *forever* to get it back into a release-ready state. It's a death spiral of a development process. Splitting into devel/stable is one way to fix it, because stable is based on *stable* code (i.e., what's on the 1.34.x branch), and devel is based on head (which is a bit of a mess at the moment). If "devel" became stable, would we need "stable"? - Doug