Re: [boost] Proposal: formal update review

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-12 18:04:46

Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Pavel Vozenilek ha escrito:

>

>> "Fernando Cacciola" wrote:

>>

>> > The very high quaility of boost libraries is due to the so-called BOOST

>> > METHOD (I just coined the term, but how I like it :): the managed and

>> > peer-reviewed acceptance process.

>> >

>>

>> The very high quality is due to people who choose

>> to hang out here and contribute.

>>

>> Bigger problem that API changes are abandoned

>> libraries. A tool or a process helping to maintain

>> these libraries is needed. Even visible

>> marking of these libraries is missing.

>

> I'd say library adopting should be encouraged: Maybe posting

> a "Maintainer wanted for Boost.XXX" message would raise some

> activity in this respect?

I think it might be a good idea to actively remove stigma from

abandoning libraries.  If Boost.Threads, for example, had been

officially marked as "abandoned" a while ago, I think people might've

been quicker to consider taking it over.  There's always the fear of

stepping on the original author's toes.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com