Re: [date_time] Library status?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Jeff Garland <
jeff <at> crystalclearsoftware.com> wrote:

> 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.

Has anyone taken the lead to get these changes into date-time? If someone
will get patches ready, and have them approved by Jeff, I'll be happy to
apply them. Just include me in the email exchange with Jeff.

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