Re: [boost] Boost.Process article: Tutorial and request for comments

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Process article: Tutorial and request for comments
From: Boris Schaeling (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-01 09:35:18

On Fri, 29 May 2009 18:10:23 +0200, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>  
wrote:

Hi Dave,

> [...]Looks like a really useful library, and the docs are very readable.
> Sorry, I know this will seem trivial, and I see that you took care to
> note it on your webpage, but when posting about a library that is not
> yet in Boost, I'd appreciate it if you could make that clear.  Just
> starting with "I've written an article about the proposed Boost.Process"
> could be enough, though it's also be good to get an indicator in the
> subject line.

ok, no problem. There have been so many Boost.Process forks last year  
though that it took me quite some time to merge them. Unless someone else  
really plans to take over responsibility for Boost.Process and doesn't  
change only minor things (thus creating another fork) I hope that this  
proposed Boost.Process library remains the only one. There is no problem  
if a differently designed Boost.Process library is proposed. But in the  
past years all the Boost.Process libraries were forks and you didn't  
really know which one to pick (which lead me to merge them all).

Boris