Re: [boost] Proposal for new variants of the Boost logo.

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for new variants of the Boost logo.
From: Jeffrey Bosboom (jbosboom_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-08 22:20:39

Jeffrey Bosboom wrote:
> Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>>
>> 1  For projects that are written with Boost 'in mind', perhaps for 
>> submission,
>> but are *not yet reviewed and accepted*.
>>
>>   "For use with"  - logo for projects having some association with 
>> Boost, but
>> are *not 'official'*.
>>
>> (Many like red text to signal strongly that this is NOT (perhaps yet) 
>> a Boost
>> approved library).
> 
> I don't think this is self-descriptive enough.  For example, GIL is a 
> Boost library, and GIL extensions are obviously "for use with" Boost. 
> But I don't think "for use with" implies "not officially part of" Boost.

To clarify, I mean that a GIL extension that has not gone through the 
Boost review process would probably display "for use with".  But since 
extensions are "for use with" by nature, the special designator on the 
logo would not seem 'out of place' enough for a documentation reader to 
realize it means "not official".

--Jeffrey Bosboom