Rene Eng <gemini67 <at> gmail.com> writes:
- You have to maintain 3 sets of the Boost library that are in itself compatible.
I might have missed it, bu t I thought this discussion was not about 3 version of the library. This is definitely, not something I'd support.
- What is with bug fixes in the stable version? Wouldn't it take more time until a bug fix could finally be provided in the stable version?
That's question is unclear to me
- What is if a library should be moved to the stable version, but requires another (version of a) library which is not yet ready for the stable version, or would brake the requirements for stable versions?
That's easy: you can't depend on libraries in development to qualify for "ready for production" status.
- I suppose a new library would be available in the stable version only 1 or 2 years after it was released the first time? So if somebody wants to use e.g. the forthcoming Boost Log library, he has to wait a long time.
Why? It depends on you really. If you are willing to accept possible non-backward compatible changes or willing to stick to this particular version or willing to maintain local copy yourself - you can use any library, even just candidate. Gennadiy