Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] GGL review starts today, November 5th
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-20 22:49:21
Jonathan Franklin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Phil Endecott
> <spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> To me it seems like a bad idea to accept libraries that are submitted with
>> unfinished documentation, ...
> Contingency! The review should be contingent on an "adequate" level
> of documentation.
Thanks. Jeez! What a tough crowd! I have to say that I laughed out
loud when I read that a precedent of accepting things into boost with
inadequate documentation should not be set! Too late! Some existing
boost libraries took quite awhile to come up to the level of
documentation we enjoy today. There are still noticeable differences
from library to library in the wonderfulness that is boost
documentation. Almost everyday on the user's group someone is posting
about some library saying, "Help! I've read all the documentation on
this library and I can't get a clue in the forest of clues on two for 1
free clue day!" (I may be paraphrasing a bit;) Now--all of a
sudden--documentation has to be complete and professional to be
considered for inclusion in boost. Hope there's a grandfather clause!
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