From: Jigish (jigish.patel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-03 18:44:41
I haven't read the entire chain of emails, so i might be wayy off
here. I apologize if that's the case.
But think about it. Why do people write/maintain them? Usually because
it's something they believe in. If you convince them that the proposed
changes will increase adoption/usage I think that would be a
sufficient enough motivation. Threatening just seems like a bad idea
and maybe, a sign of insufficient communication.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 3, 2007, at 3:04 PM, "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Thomas Witt wrote:
>> We have zero leverage over library developers.
>> Let me repeat this:
>> We have ZERO LEVERAGE over library developers.
>> Any approach that relies on people doing things when asked is doomed.
> So what do you recommend? There are two options, addressing the zero
> leverage problem by using the threat of not including a library in a
> release, or somehow doing a release without depending on the library
> developers. Which one would you pick?
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk