On 3/16/17 11:07 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
And the fact that the ticket hangs for several years doesn't mean it's not valid now.
A difference in philosophy, as I said. Yes, in principle all open tickets should be preserved for all eternity because, even though nothing was done for seven years, after five more years someone might actually do something. But the odds say otherwise. It's much more likely that the ticket is either obsolete, or will never get any attention.
Often times when something is on the list for X years, it's because it's not actually fixable with a readonable amount of effort. For example, for the serialization library there's an issue in that one can't serialize a pointer to a pointer. This could be fixed, but not without upending a whole lot of stuff. And since it's a very, very rare case, it's more practical to expect the user to work around it in some way. But it's worth leaving on the list "forever" until the library is re-implemented. It's also valuable for the next person who comes upon this so the whole back and forth about it doesn't have to be repeated. So if you want to move git issues - fine. Just leave the trac as a readonly archive. If we "require" git, note that we'll be strapping ourselves to git for a very long times. Good or Bad it should be considered. If that's good, we might just deemphasize distribution via zip file and just encourage people to clone the git repository. For me this is a convenient way to work. But what about when boost outlives git - as it has a host of other projects, services (like sourceforge) Robert Ramey