Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation - was C++ Networking Library Release 0.5

Subject: Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation - was C++ Networking Library Release 0.5
From: Joachim Faulhaber (afojgo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-01 17:47:40

2010/2/1 Patrick Horgan <phorgan1_at_[hidden]>:
> Thomas Klimpel wrote:
>>
>> It's not so easy. That they were rejected during a formal boost review
>> doesn't necessarily mean that they are no longer associated with boost. The
>> current agreement is to limit the number of different logos, especially no
>> special logo for rejected libraries. I'm perfectly OK with this. The status
>> of a library rejected during review is quite similar to the status of a
>> library that is not yet proposed for review, so I think the same logo could
>> be appropriate for both. A quite common case will also be that a rejected
>> library is simply not touched again after it was rejected. So this could be
>> also OK (="time freeze").
>>
>
> My 3 cents.  If they have been rejected, but are still working to improve
> the proposal, then they are still proposed for.  If they have abandoned the
> effort, either by abandoning the software completely, or by deciding to
> continue without the software outside of any association with boost, then
> they don't need a special icon for that state.  They might be using boost,
> but are not in any other way associated with boost.

Why are you assuming that failing in a formal review implies abandoning
association to boost. This can be an understandable reaction if grand and
unrealistic expectations were held that did not meet reality. Other people
may experience they learned a lot and have another try in a different
library project.

My idea to introduce a state "boost compliant" could be an acknowledgement
of the simple truth, that the library, in the process to be prepared for formal
review gained quality and implements all the conventions and properties
that are necessary (but not necessarily sufficient) for a boost library to
be accepted.

Regards,
Joachim