Subject: Re: [boost] Review Queue Needs Attention
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-24 22:26:33
> 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
What's the difference between a non-stable branch as you're suggesting and
the existing sandbox? The only difference I could see is to establish some
kind of pre-review process. But that would just move the problem to a
different spot, no?
Meet me at BoostCon
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk