Re: [boost] [Review][PQS] Concept names?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-12 10:25:32

David Greene <greened_at_[hidden]> writes:

>>    E. Is the documentation good enough for a boost library?
>
> This has been made very clear and Andy has graciously accepted
> the suggested documentation changes.

Andy has indeed graciously accepted criticism of the documentation,
for which I commend him.

What's missing for me is a clear intention to actively pursue better
docs himself, as opposed to being willing to accept specific edits
that other people happen to suggest.  If we leave the quality of our
documentation (or code, for that matter) up to people who rewrite it
for us, we won't have much quality at all.  IMO the library author
has to be willing to take responsibility for making the docs work; any
help from the outside is a bonus.

<soapbox>
Learning to write good documentation isn't easy, and we need to work
hard at helping people to learn that skill.  That said, it *has* to be
a "teach a man to fish" sort of thing, because at the end of the day,
there are just too many docs to be written.  
</soapbox>

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