From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-23 17:38:05
Douglas Gregor wrote:
> On Feb 23, 2008, at 5:46 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
>> root/more/index.html has disappeared, as has all of the content. That
>> isn't acceptable.
>> Even if much of the content is moved elsewhere, index.html has to
>> continue to exist, so that users can continue to find the content.
>> It is
>> OK for some of the links on root/more/index.html to refer to the
>> web site.
>> It is OK to move content out of the release and into the web site
>> if it
>> is unlikely to be referenced in the process of actually using a
>> Any of the content that is likely to used by users of a release
>> must be
>> restored. Releases have to be usable without Internet connectivity.
> I agree, but how much content do we actually need in the release?
Probably more than half of what's there now isn't required for a
release. For example, stuff aimed at Boost developers only need not be
part of each release.
> think we should be minimal, focusing on installation, "Getting
> Started", library documentation, and "what's new in this release."
>> Pages like the License information, How to report bugs, and FAQ
>> have to
>> be part of a release.
> The license is in LICENSE_1_0.txt. The discussion and justification
> of the license in more/ don't need to be in a release, because that's
> the kind of thing you find when you google for the Boost license to
> see if it's compatible with another license you're using.
That's not acceptable in environments with limited connectivity, and
inside many large organizations. In both those cases, anything that
isn't in the distribution doesn't exist. With limited connectivity the
problem is physical, within big organizations the problem is mindset;
they don't trust anything that isn't on their own servers.
I think the key question is "Is this content needed by users?", and if
the answer is yes it should go in the release
> The FAQ is mostly information for people who either (1) are decided
> whether or how to get Boost, or (2) thinking of participating in the
> Boost community in some way. Both of those require an Internet
> connection anyway, so there's no need to have the FAQ in a release.
Another group is those considering the use of Boost. Their
organization's legal folks have blessed Boost, it has been installed on
one of the organization's servers, linked to from internal software
engineering web pages, and a few early adopters are reporting good
results. So now people on most projects are willing to look at it. They
haven't looked at it on the web, because that would be a waste of their
time until the prerequisites have been met.
In the academic world, and in small companies, people are curious.
Programmers look at web sites like Boost looking for ideas. But there is
a whole parallel universe where programmers only look at officially
blessed stuff on company servers. Sad but true.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk