Re: [boost] Re: Re: Re: Traits-based design and ODR

From: Greg Colvin (greg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-05-03 12:27:01

At 09:16 AM 05/03/2002, Andrei wrote:
>"Greg Colvin" <greg_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>news:5.1.0.14.0.20020502190540.02ae0b40_at_GMMAIL...
>> At 06:41 PM 05/02/2002, you wrote:
>>
>> >As I wrote in my post "Adding Loki to Boost: reprise", I believe
>that it's
>> >best I don't put myself in a negotiator's position.
>>
>> By "we" I meant "us".  That is, Boost.  And our style of
>> negotiation tends toward vigorous, exaggerated argument,
>> which is half the fun of it all.  Especially when, in the
>> end, we find ourselves in violent agreement.
>
>It's true it might be fun to some. Something has to be said, though.
>
>The drawback is that it tends to scare off many. This has the
>unfortunate potential effect of admitting libraries from people with
>better negotiating/marketing/debating skills, rather than libraries
>that are technically better.

Yes, that is a danger.  But getting a proposal through a
Boost debate is nothing compared to getting a proposal
through the full committee.  Putting something into the
standard is a serious responsibility, and part of the
seriousness is being sure that the final proposal can
withstand criticism.  There are lots of chances for bad
feelings, as people differ widely in what offends them.
So I try to never take or give offense -- not that I can
always succeed.

>For what it's worth, following my post "Adding Loki to Boost:
>reprise", in which I kindly ask for Boost's help in adopting Loki, I
>got many private emails from several categories of people: (1) some
>who have had a library admitted into Boost and who wished me good
>luck, mentioning that they are too corroded by the admission process
>to be able to post anything in Loki's favor; (2) some who do
>participate to boost's discussions sometimes and promised technical
>help, /if I make it through the debate process alone/, (3) lurkers
>(some of whom are prominent in the C++ community) who wished me luck
>as well, but told me that I am alone in posting, because they can't
>cope with the debate anymore.

Remember that the smart pointer debate already has a
long, unpleasant history.