On 09/12/16 10:28 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 09/12/16 09:47 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 08/12/16 11:50 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/12/16 01:41 -, Joseph Stockman wrote:
Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for those who want
to utilize any of the
On 09/12/16 09:47 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 08/12/16 11:50 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/12/16 01:41 -, Joseph Stockman wrote:
Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for those who want
to utilize any of the C++11 features (futures, etc). We've been forced
On 08/12/16 11:50 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/12/16 01:41 -, Joseph Stockman wrote:
Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for those who want
to utilize any of the C++11 features (futures, etc). We've been forced to drop
all Fedora support for our products unt
On 06/12/16 01:41 -, Joseph Stockman wrote:
Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for those who want
to utilize any of the C++11 features (futures, etc). We've been forced to drop
all Fedora support for our products until that changes.
Are you "Uncle Vlad" on ask.fe
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 01:41 +, Joseph Stockman wrote:
> Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for
> those who want to utilize any of the C++11 features (futures, etc).
> We've been forced to drop all Fedora support for our products until
> that changes.
Well a Boost vers
Well, it continues to mean the busted version of boost::asio for those who want
to utilize any of the C++11 features (futures, etc). We've been forced to drop
all Fedora support for our products until that changes.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I messed up the change proposal for Boost 1.61 in F25, which means it
> isn't on the schedule.
>
> Given the huge amount of work involved in every Boost update, I'm not
> going to be too upset if I don't have to do it!
I'd leave i
