From: Andrew Sutton (asutton_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-27 12:33:00
> To those interested, // sorrt
Oops... accidental pasting.
> I have more to say on the topic, but I will split it into a second
> email since this is pretty long.
Since my SoC package constitutes a significant addition to the
Boost.Graph library, Jeremy and I felt that it would benefit from the
formal review process - especially the newer code that is concerned
with the library interface. However, we're unsure if the review needs
the same formality as a completely new library since this is, as
mentioned, a (albeit rather large) change to an existing library.
An alternate idea might be to take these changes and any new
Boost.Graph algorithms in the vault as a single introduction. This
- the planar graph suite
- cycle ratio code
- floyd-warshall (new params)
A third option - and actually not a terrible idea - would be to
branch the Boost.Graph trunk, perform the integration and then do
some serious housekeeping like cleaning up tests, examples,
documentations, making sure the interface is clean and consistent,
and - god forbid - putting Boost.Graph into boost::graph.
The more I think about it, the more I'm becoming a fan of the third
option. Unfortunately, it's also a fairly large chunk of work and
would take a serious commitment from the developer(s) working on it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk