Re: [date_time] Library status?

Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Andrey Semashev
>> <andrey.semashev <at> gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> The Boost.DateTime library is very useful, and it is unfortunate to
>>> admit that according to Trac report and personal experience, its current
>>> state is anything but good. There are long standing tickets, some of
>>> them are trivial to fix and have patches already attached. The most
>>> annoying ones are missing includes and name clashes (tickets 642, 1740,
>>> 1615, 2083, 2091 to name some of them). Is this library still maintained?
>>
>> I've forwarded the above to Jeff Garland. If he doesn't respond we will
>> authorize someone else to apply at least the trivial fixes.

My apologies -- the last 6th months have seen the time I have to devote to 
Boost essentially evaporate...I really haven't even been able to watch the 
mailing list or do any date-time maintenance.  I'm certainly still planning to 
continue supporting the library, but I don't want to hold up critical fixes 
just because I'm short on time right now.  If someone wants to take the lead 
on applying a few of these fixes please just email me directly -- I can find 
30-60 minutes to scan the changes and make sure they will be compatible going 
forward.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost