On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Vladimir Prus <vladi...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On Tuesday 27 October 2009 Daniel James wrote: > >> A lot of boost users don't have a distributor and we don't have the >> resources to do it ourselves. > > Are you sure about the last part?
No, but we haven't managed so far. > It does not seem that the proposal here > is to create patch releases that get the same amount of testing that > "official" > releases get. If no, there's pretty small overhead regardless of the used > version control system. Sure. > I think we had this discussion on the Boost mailing list some time ago, when > a boost release came with a serious issue in one of the libraries, and > "hotfix" > patch was made available. For some reason, release + hotfix was considered > better > than a patch release with the same amount of testing. I never liked that myself. I think it was considered better as we wouldn't have to deal with building the documentation, running release scripts etc. > It might be worth to restart that discussion. Maybe, you could bring it up on the main list. The biggest obstacle is probably finding someone to take charge. Daniel _______________________________________________ Boost-cmake mailing list Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake
