Re: [boost] New but 'unsupported' libs Was: Status of the Boost.Property_tree library

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-12 13:27:49

on Tue Mar 11 2008, "Paul Baxter" <pauljbaxter-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:

>> What is the status of the Boost.Property_tree library?  I notice it is now 
>> in the SVN trunk.   Does this mean it will be part of the next release?
>>
>> <https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/trunk/boost/property_tree/>
>
> I really like the simplicity of this library but this is about the third or 
> fourth request in the last few months without a reply.
>
> This is not a slight on the original author or this library, but it does 
> bring up the more general question..
>
> Does boost really want to put an 'unsupported' new library into a release?

No.

> I'd suggest the release manager consider leaving such libraries in the
> sandbox if they haven't got a commitment from an individual and they
> haven't yet been incorporated in a release.

Agreed.  In the past we've always assumed that the library author is
prepared to support it.  Usually that's been a safe assumption, but not
always.  

> A first release is likely to shake down a library more than the review
> process and it is at this point the author or perhaps a maintainer is
> valuable. Indeed many libraries change radically enough after the
> review that they often benefit tremendously from the shakedown that
> first release gives them.
>
> Perhaps new libs need a named sponsor as an entry criterion for 
> incorporation?

In fact, I don't think we should bother accepting review requests
without a commitment from someone to support the code should it be
accepted.  Naming a responsible support party should be part of the
review request requirements.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://boost-consulting.com