From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-02 07:40:08
From: "Lars Gullik Bjønnes" <larsbj_at_[hidden]>
> "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]> writes:
> | Oh, please! Most of the developers are at least using some components
> | another boost library.
> What has that got to do with responding to anything regarding the
> libraries that are not "yours"?
Nothing. Your claim was:
> > all developers just sit
> > on their own turf (read: library) and does not bother to look at
> > others.
It's not true. As a rule we use one-another's libraries and when they break
we try to fix them.
> >> In essence this mean that using boost.devel to report bugs is just a
> >> waste of time, you always have to get in contact with the library
> >> maintainer (which is most often one single person.) It would be a lot
> >> better if the "hard-core" boosters also looked at other libraries and
> >> helped to get obvious and easy patches committed without having to
> >> rely on just the library maintainer.
> | That actually happens from time-to-time.
> Sure I have seen it happen... after second or third time posting of a
> patch, or for problems that are larger and needs to be resolved there
> and then.
That's entirely appropriate. I don't want someone patching my library for
me unless it's an emergency and I've become completely unreachable. They'll
probably get it wrong. Likewise, I'd much rather wait until the situation
is intolerable than introduce a bug in someone else's code.
> | I could also say "it would be a lot better if the community at large
> | making a bigger contribution". We hard-cores are busy people.
> I cannot do much more than send patches and test...
That's always appreciated. Which libraries have you sent patches for other
> >> Even if this sounds a bit negative, I am really grateful for the time
> >> and effort the boosters put into this.
> | Your gratefulness is appreciated, but I would much prefer you would ask
> | yourself what you can do to make a difference. Perhaps you and Bjorn
> | find a way to reduce response times...
> You mean apart from testing and using boost all the time and sending
> patches when I discover I can fix a problem myself?
> So IMHO I am already trying to make a difference.
Try asking yourself how you could make a difference in the responsiveness
to patch postings.
> | BTW, other projects use the (IMO lousy but perhaps better than nothing)
> | SourceForge patch tracker; it's taken for granted that patches will be
> | forgotten unless they're in the tracker.
> Other projects or Boost?
How could I possibly make it clearer?
> (if boost... it has never been mentioned on this list before...)
> Currently the number of maintence patches to boost libraries is very
> low, so imho they are better handled on this list.
Do we really have a big problem with responsiveness to these patches? How
long have you had to wait, how many times?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk