Subject: Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation - was C++ Networking Library Release 0.5
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-01 10:05:32
Patrick Horgan wrote:
> LOL! I can't imagine anyone would proudly proclaim "my software was
> rejected by boost!"
Well, not exactly "proudly proclaim". But the library author might take a "time off" from development of a rejected library, and he might want to clearly indicate the current state of the library. However, when I proposed "rejected by" instead of "rejected proposal for" (assuming it was too long), I thought that any clear short enough text would do, because it would be used rarely anyway.
> If they are rejected by boost though, they have no
> business showing a boost logo associated with their software
It's not so easy. That they were rejected during a formal boost review doesn't necessarily mean that they are no longer associated with boost. The current agreement is to limit the number of different logos, especially no special logo for rejected libraries. I'm perfectly OK with this. The status of a library rejected during review is quite similar to the status of a library that is not yet proposed for review, so I think the same logo could be appropriate for both. A quite common case will also be that a rejected library is simply not touched again after it was rejected. So this could be also OK (="time freeze").
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk