From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-17 19:04:47
At 05:56 PM 9/17/2002, Paul Mensonides wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]>
>
>> > Also, I haven't understood Mr. Abrahams idea about a boost release
>> > being "something available". I think we should not forget that when
>> > boost releases there will certainly be a lot of people that will
start
>> > using the released code. If the goal is only to have the code
>> > available for the committee why not creating e.g. a "committee
>> > sandbox" instead of binding people with something released in a hurry
>> > and, above all, not (expressly) for their use?
>>
>> This is out of context. 1.29.0 was supposed to go out a month ago.
That's
>> the problem that is being discussed.
>
>This is partly because of me. I had to stabilize the preprocessor
library
>in on relatively short notice, and several other library's are using it,
>so they were waiting for me.
It wasn't a problem with any one person or library. More a confluence of
factors.
Look at it this way; many commercial software projects would consider it a
plus to only miss a ship target by a month. Not to mention we should be
thankful that several Boost developers were willing to put in long hours to
deal with various situations that arose.
--Beman