On 07/07/2020 16:37, Alexander Grund via Boost wrote:
Am 07.07.20 um 17:19 schrieb Niall Douglas via Boost:
On 07/07/2020 16:05, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Niall Douglas wrote:
We discussed whether adding an alternative naming for copy_exception() could be called a major change. It is both major (API change) and potentially breaking (code that already defines its own make_exception_ptr may break).
The commit in question is https://github.com/ned14/outcome/commit/eff410f5943e5acc16ab005e128096b27021...
From API change view it conditionally removes a function from the detail namespace with no effect for the upcoming release. In the case BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined it replaces an include of "boost/exception_ptr.hpp" with a forward declaration of that class. From what I understood "boost/exception_ptr.hpp" cannot be included when BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS is defined or compilation will fail.
Hence I conclude that this is a pure bugfix (things compile that did not before) with no API or breaking change. As bugfix commits are still allowed according to the review schedule this is fine.
Or am I missing anything?
Yes, I think Peter's issue is with the commit to Boost.Exception, not to Boost.Outcome. Niall