Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Phoenix review starts today, September 21st
From: dan marsden (danmarsden_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-28 04:13:23
Daniel Walker wrote:
>Of course not. :-) But going in-depth into V2's implementation is not
>the same as going in-depth into V3. The design may be the same, but
>simple diffing and greping shows the implementations are not. And
>that's to be expected. As I understand, whole components were gutted
>and replaced with Proto, which is a good thing. So let's continue that
>effort and spend our energy on V3 and not look back!
>Now, how that relates to the review formalities and the fact that
>apparently V2 is under review, I am not sure. As far as I can tell,
>all the reviews thus far have assumed the V2 implementation. I would
>suggest withdrawing V2 from consideration (leaving it as is in
>Boost.Spirit), finishing V3 (which becomes the new Boost.Lambda), and
>then resubmitting for review, but I'm no expert on this process.
It is my understanding that Boost authors retain the "rights" to modify and
upgrade their libraries once accepted, both in terms of implementation
and interface changes. Boost.Xpressive has seen many changes iirc,
including the sorts of changes that we're discussing (reimplementing
in terms of proto + I believe some smaller interface changes). Many
other libraries have similar history. If the authors of these libraries
had stated their development plans, in advance of review, should they
have been rejected until they were "finished"? Joel has been very open
in stating his future plans, but what he plans has happened many times
before to accepted libraries.
Obviously the rather fluid state of the libraries does muddy the purpose
of the review. I'd suggest we review libraries as is, answer all the usual
questions about interface, quality of implementation, docs etc. There seems
to be some implicit assumption that the author will act in the spirit of
Boost, and reimplement + extend to the same level of quality as seen in
the review. I think Joels track record in this area speaks for itself.
On your other comment about Phoenix2 remaining under Spirit if it were not
to be accepted, that is obviously true, but at some employers/organizations
passing the review process and being an official part of a Boost release is
a prerequisite to using a library.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk