Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for new variants of the Boost logo.
From: Patrick Horgan (phorgan1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-09 20:30:51
Jeffrey Bosboom wrote:
> Stewart, Robert wrote:
>> Please suggest an alternative. We tried numerous *short* phrases and
>> settled on "for use with" as being the most broadly applicable to
>> non-accepted libraries. If you have a better idea that fits well in
>> the logo space available, please share it. We've found that two
>> lines of text can fit nicely in the space we've used, but the two
>> lines must be aesthetically balanced.
> If the message we want to convey is that the library is not part of
> Boost, perhaps we should just say "not part of [boost C++ libraries]".
> This might cause some reader confusion as to why the logo is used at
> all, but it makes very clear that no official approval has been granted.
We also want to encourage people to submit libraries, and to some
people, asking them to put this message on their software would seem
mean. (Yes, there are sensitive geeks;)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk