Andrey Semashev wrote:
Also, I suggest we name the first Boost version that requires C++11 as Boost 2.0 and the C++03-compatible releases continue to be 1.x. The compiled binaries for 2.x should be named differently from 1.x, i.e. add a new tag in 2.x binaries.
This will be a much bigger change that will break _a lot_ more things than just C++03, so I'm not sure how enthusiastic I am about it.
This will make it easier for downstream consumers to ship 2.x and 1.x releases side by side, should it be needed. Point releases may not be convenient for downstream since, for example, Debian dev packages for Boost are named as libboost-math1.74-dev (no point version).
As long as the point releases are kept binary compatible, packagers can still replace 1.82.0 with 1.82.1 using their own versioning mechanism. https://ubuntu.pkgs.org/22.04/ubuntu-universe-amd64/libboost-math1.74-dev_1....