RE: [boost] Re: Re: [1.33.0] Feature freeze reminder
----Original Message---- From: Jeff Flinn [mailto:TriumphSprint2000@hotmail.com] Sent: 23 May 2005 14:12 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: [boost] Re: Re: [1.33.0] Feature freeze reminder
"Martin Slater" <mslater@hellinc.net> wrote in message news:428EBB2F.5060101@hellinc.net...
The problem is that I want to add code that will handle the previous pointer version. My concern is that users might want to use 1.33 to read archives created under 1.32 and without this addition this won't be possible. I presume that some numbers of people would be effected by such a situation. If not I could just forget it.
Without backwards compatibility with the old shared pointer serialization I for one would not be able to upgrade to the latest version until it appears. All a pain really as I was looking forward to the new improved version.
I'll second that.
Jeff Flinn
Is it being suggested that "adding backwards compatibility" is a new feature, as opposed to fixing a bug? I think it will be /enormously/ damaging to Boost's reputation for professional quality software if it is not possible to read a 1.32 archive with 1.33. It doesn't take long to build a reputation for "you can never read a file from old versions", and FOREVER to get rid of it. -- Martin Bonner Martin.Bonner@Pitechnology.com Pi Technology, Milton Hall, Ely Road, Milton, Cambridge, CB4 6WZ, ENGLAND Tel: +44 (0)1223 441434
Martin Bonner <martin.bonner@pitechnology.com> writes:
Subject: [boost] Re: Re: [1.33.0] Feature freeze reminder
"Martin Slater" <mslater@hellinc.net> wrote in message news:428EBB2F.5060101@hellinc.net...
The problem is that I want to add code that will handle the previous pointer version. My concern is that users might want to use 1.33 to read archives created under 1.32 and without this addition this won't be possible. I presume that some numbers of people would be effected by such a situation. If not I could just forget it.
Without backwards compatibility with the old shared pointer serialization I for one would not be able to upgrade to the latest version until it appears. All a pain really as I was looking forward to the new improved version.
I'll second that.
Jeff Flinn
Is it being suggested that "adding backwards compatibility" is a new feature, as opposed to fixing a bug?
I think it will be /enormously/ damaging to Boost's reputation for professional quality software if it is not possible to read a 1.32 archive with 1.33. It doesn't take long to build a reputation for "you can never read a file from old versions", and FOREVER to get rid of it.
Yeah, I think this probably falls under "bug fixing," or at least "critical feature without which we had better not ship." -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
On May 24, 2005, at 6:45 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
Martin Bonner <martin.bonner@pitechnology.com> writes:
Is it being suggested that "adding backwards compatibility" is a new feature, as opposed to fixing a bug?
I think it will be /enormously/ damaging to Boost's reputation for professional quality software if it is not possible to read a 1.32 archive with 1.33. It doesn't take long to build a reputation for "you can never read a file from old versions", and FOREVER to get rid of it.
Yeah, I think this probably falls under "bug fixing," or at least "critical feature without which we had better not ship."
Yes, it's a bug. I've already given Robert the go-ahead to fix it for 1.33.0. Doug
participants (3)
-
David Abrahams -
Douglas Gregor -
Martin Bonner