From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-01 15:17:01
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Depends on where we want Boost to go. Do we want just a repository of fairly
> useful libraries (for some broad definition of "useful")? Or do we want
> Boost to be a "sandbox library working group", where library authors go to
> get a feel of how the committee operates, to establish the infamous
> "existing practice" that is often needed for a standard library proposal,
> and so on?
> This question has never been given a clear answer; I suspect that the reason
> is that most Boost members want to have both. But "having both" will break
> sooner or later, as Boost grows.
Why do you think so?
> It may already have broken but we can't see it yet.
> My personal opinion is that we should move away from the "anything
> goes as long as it's useful" model and move even closer to a
> "sandbox LWG" model; I'd go even further and suggest that we should
> have an "official" paper submission process and an "official"
> agenda. In a "sandbox LWG" reviewing a library without documentation
> is simply unacceptable, although reviewing a documentation without
> library is not!
While I agree that documentation should be a prerequisite for a
review, I think you may underestimate the value to the standardization
process of having a fairly broad scope of libraries in Boost, even if
some may never be suitable for the standard. Since one major aim of
the next standard is to support library development, it's important to
be able to cite Boost's existing practice where functionality is
needed. Justifiably or not, IMO other libraries don't get the same
respect. Also, our vision today of what's suitable for
standardization is considerably evolved from what it was two years
ago. If we fail to consider some libraries on the basis of their
"projected standardizability", we may find ourselves missing one or
more libraries that really should be in the WP two years from now.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk