Re: [boost] Re: TR2 and C++0x heads up

From: Iain K. Hanson (ikh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-26 19:35:28

On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 07:28:04PM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
> "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
[snip]

> > |
> > | If you want to be sure to avoid wasted work you need to participate in
> > | the committee process and build consensus on the reflectors between
> > | meetings... and even then it is possible to fail.  Dave H. didn't do
> > | that AFAICT.  There's no good reason to think that Andrei's impression
> > | that "people really liked the idea" should be enough to ensure that
> > | the next proposal would be accepted.

Dave, I fully accept the spirit of your post and of Beman's preceeding posts
and I think I pretty much get the gist. However, the implication ofn the above
is that if I am not a member of the committee then my proposal is at a 
disadvantage because I can not lobby on the reflectors.

Could you or Beman elaborate on the position of a boost member who is not a 
member of the comittee and the process that they can follow for making
a proposal to the committee without being a member.

Are we at a disadvantage?

/ikh