From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-05 10:42:48
David Abrahams wrote:
> When discussing libraries in public that are under development but not
> yet accepted into Boost, I think it's problematic to refer to "The
> Boost <whatever> library" or "Boost.<whatever>" without qualification.
> Our peer-review process is respected, and these libraries are not yet
> officially blessed by Boost. I don't want to dilute the value of
> Boost acceptance. Can we please make a habit of prepending "The
> proposed" or something similar? For example, I suggest "The proposed
> Boost Interfaces library.
I understand the problem. With the interfaces library, the documentation
contains a prominent disclaimer, and so does every source file.
I can't think of anything better right now, but to me "proposed" suggests that
the libray is in the review queue.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk