Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Maintenace Guidelines wiki page
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-24 09:33:18

on Sun Nov 23 2008, "Daniel Walker" <daniel.j.walker-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

>> One of the reasons Boost exists is to be more nimble than any
>> committee (particularly the C++ standards committee) can be.
>
> That's true, but at the same time, one goal of boost, as I've
> understood it, is to establish existing practice, which could
> eventually lead to inclusion in the standard library. So, yes, boost
> should be more nimble than the ISO, but I think it should not be so
> fluid as to make the peer review process meaningless and undermine
> progress toward establishing best practices.

Do you actually think the current peer review process is meaningless,
due to the fluidity of our operations?

I wish I could get someone to just start composing a page of best
practices without jumping headlong into trying to impose constraints on
our contributors.  We haven't even tried making such guidelines
available yet.

I guess I don't think it would be unreasonable to ask the release
managers, as guardians of release quality, to monitor changes to the
tests when they are checked into the release branch.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com