John Maddock wrote:
I was wondering about this earlier today, what if we alternated point releases and full releases? We should as Beman says get the current system semi-automatic *first* of course!
John. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
I was thinking the same thing last night as I retired to bed. As a user of Boost who is constantly trying to get clients to adopt the libraries... it would help. I think users would be happy getting full releases each 6-months. If there is a new library that is compelling to use yet isn't in the official release, people can simply add it. I had several clients running Boost.Asio that way for quite a time. I appreciate the push-back from library developers about point releases; however, adoption of libraries by the general public is dependent on stability. This includes non-breaking changes. I have three clients that will not be moving from 1.34.1 anytime soon because of the in-house havoc it will create. If every official release from Boost results in the possibility of breaking changes then the general popularity of the library set will decrease. I would like to say that the increased popularity of Boostpro services (and others) to offer more frequent patched results would increase but thus far my experience with clients would not suggest that. I personally would love to see John's suggestion implemented. It doesn't require additional resources than currently planned and seems to take the users' concerns into account. -- ---------------------------------- Michael Caisse Object Modeling Designs www.objectmodelingdesigns.com