Subject: Re: [boost] Review Queue Needs Attention
From: Tom Brinkman (reportbase_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-24 17:31:45
>> judging by the review schedule (almost no review managers), that would mean
>> boost isn't very interested in new libraries in general.
It would seem so.
>> I would recommend that authors try find a review manager before they request a review.
Review managers are generally recruited from people that already have a library
that has been approved in boost, that means you luke (hint).
The wizards could open it up to anyone. Its been considered, but
rejected in the past.
I would like to focus attention on something different.
That would be creating a "non-stable"
branch of boost, where the proposed libraries would live for a while, get some
Since most libraries are header file only, it should not be a problem.
While not all
will compile on all platforms, and certainly not have perfect
documentation, it would
be a place for future boost authors to elicit feedback.
The experimental libraries would not affect the core boost libraries
in any way.
I'm absolutely convinced that it would encourage lots more participation.
There is so much more to do, we haven't even scratched the surface of what
is possible. The core boost authors have put in place a wonderful place
to come and share ideas, but we are letting it flounder.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk