From: Mike Sackett (msackett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-04-13 12:22:36
It strikes me as a reasonable request, though perhaps it would be wise to
solicit similar support from other compiler vendors to avoid appearing to
favor a single one. I, for one, pay close attention to what Boost
members/contributors say about compilers, especially with regard to
standards compliance. I think it's reasonable to conclude that some
users, upon seeing a vendor's logo on the Boost web site, will conclude
that there is some level of endorsement or consensus in favor of the
On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Beman Dawes wrote:
> Boost has no budget at all. We get a bit of free logistical support from
> individuals, universities, and corporations. So far, the corporate support
> has been mostly in the form of letting employees contribute to Boost on
> company time. We've never been asked to acknowledge any corporate support.
> Now a company has offered us a license for their compiler, so it can be
> included in Boost regression tests, and reported on the appropriate status
> They have also asked (but not made their offer contingent upon) that we
> acknowledge their support on the status page, and link to their web site
> with a small logo. There were no other strings attached. I have not
> mentioned the company name because any policy we set should apply to all
> such corporate support, not just one company's.
> I imagine something like this on the status page:
> [logo] Crash-and-Burn compiler contributed by the BelchFire company.
> It seems to me that this is a reasonable request, and in fact it is better
> for us to acknowledge such support up front.
> What do others think?
> To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk