From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-01 15:59:24
Tom Brinkman wrote:
> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>> Another easy improvement would be to add accepted libraries under a
>> probation or beta period of say six months. The library would
>> remain beta until its stable enough and has additional time for more
>> user scrutiny. A prominent boost member would make the judgement
>> about when to remove the library from its beta period. During the
>> beta period, the library author would be asked to complete the
>> libraries documentation, examples and requested changes from the
>> additional user scrutiny.
>>> Why make a library which has been in development for a long time
>>> and has received intense scrutiny undergo a probationary period?
> When a library is in the beta period, the author could change the
> public interfaces based upon the usablity concerns of its users. In
> some cases, as most library's take many-many months to fully
> appreciate and learn, this could be a benefit.
> I see that the term "beta" is ubiquitious and basically means that the
> "technology" is in active development and may change before its final
> release. Labeling newly accepted libraries as "beta" for a time would
> give the libfrary author more time to refine the submission.
Labeling a library as beta may discourage people from using it, reducing the
amount of user feedback.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk