[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 01:09:12PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> nia <nia%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
> > On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 08:07:01AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> >> In summary, I am seriously posing the question of whether we'd be better
> >> off with 6 month old boost always, than versioned boost.
> >> What bad things would happen with slightly old boost always?
> > My only concern is that software developers should be able to test
> > their software with the latest version - that way problems get fixed.
> If the new version(s) are in wip as wip/boost177 and wip/boost178, but
> install to the same place, then people who want to test can either pbulk
> or qmake replace and then pkg_rr and test whatever they want. I do this
> with some packages that I don't feel ready to update (e.g. proj) and for
> others I do this locally uncommitted (gdal, postgis) because I don't
> expect others to test.
That is okay, I'm not opposed to boost updates requiring a full bulk
build to show they don't break anything. I'm just trying to strike
a balance between having the latest stuff and not having broken stuff.
Main Index |
Thread Index |