From: Christopher Kohlhoff (chris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-26 01:23:07
Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Gennaro Prota" <gennaro_prota_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > I haven't had time to do a serious review of Asio yet, so
> > this question may be totally dumb: will it be submitted
> > *monolitically*? It seems to me there are some parts, such
> > as the ipv4, ipv6 classes which could well live on their own
> > and be used separately from the rest. I guess many of the
> > thread related parts could be insulated as well, though
> > again I haven't checked throughly.
> You really need to address this question to Chris. It is up to
> him how he wants to structure his proposal to the committee.
It is my plan to submit it as a single proposal. In the nearish
future I hope to publish a very rough draft that will give some
idea of what I think should be included.
> But the usual practice is to put all interdependent components
> into the same proposal, even if the components are logically
> separated. Otherwise in a committee environment, you run the
> risk of the infrastructure items getting approved but the
> stuff actually useful to end-uses not getting approved, or
> visa versa.
Yeah, I wouldn't want to end up like this guy:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk