[boost] Re: Typeof: Review result

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.

Jonathan