RE: [boost] quat and oct ported to MSVC6

From: Bjorn.Karlsson_at_[hidden]
Date: 2002-05-01 06:54:49

> From: David Abrahams [mailto:david.abrahams_at_[hidden]]
> 
> I don't think we have any formal notion of a library maintainer at
> Boost. Perhaps we should? Maybe it we should label libraries 
> "stable but
> unmaintained" if their maintainers become unresponsive? Maybe
> unmaintained libraries should be "up for maintenance grabs" after a
> certain amount of time has passed?
> 
> Hmm, where have I read these questions before?
> 
> -Dave

I second that proposal. Right now some productive outcome of discussions
remain hidden in a chain of notes rather than where it really counts; in the
code.

[Maybe that could be yet another burden on the broad shoulders of the
moderators?]

Bjorn