Subject: Re: [boost] [logo] Boost logo variants for use in unofficial or unreleased boost documentation
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-04 10:38:58
Patrick Horgan wrote:
> Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> > We need to have a way of saying that this is "Hoping to be
> > proposed for review for Boost".
> > An important part of the review process, IMO, is getting a
> > user base - this is where the bugs get flushed out, and the
> > unpopular design decisions flagged up. To leave it all to
> > a final review is far too late. (It often leads to
> > rejection, sometimes improvement and re-submission, but all
> > too often, loss of promising code).
Having a special logo for this state doesn't help that process along, does it? My suggestion was to use the "powered by" logo as a placeholder in such cases. Does that detract from a work in progress? Does it impede testing and identifying bugs?
> > This is why I long argued for a formal "Not accepted, Under
> > development and worth giving a try but don't count on it
> > too much yet" status.
I think that is well handled by having a page on the Boost web site with a list of just such projects, provided those with write access are willing to take on that chore.
> > A different logo (Developing for Boost? Candidate for
> > Boost? Development for Boost? Prototype for Boost? RFC for
> > Boost? ) would provide this. Perhaps we still haven't got
> > the right words yet?
I can understand that a library developer would like to gain notoriety by association with Boost while developing a library for possible inclusion in Boost, but does a logo for that spur the author to do anything s/he wouldn't have done already? Does such a logo inform those examining such a library about something not already known?
> I really like Candidate for Boost or maybe Submission
> Candidate for Boost
One isn't a candidate for anything until one announces one's candidacy. In this case, the announcement of candidacy is a formal review request. If there's to be a logo for libraries under development but not submitted for review, "developing for" works well.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk