Subject: Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re: [rfc] rcpp)
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-24 14:19:24
On 02/24/2010 02:15 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> It's perfectly OK to move those 3 libraries to the 'detail' namespace of Boost.Task and
> have review as it is, as opposed to waiting. What do you think?
Please, don't go that way. At least Boost.Atomic is a widely demanded
addition to Boost, and if it goes as some closed implementation detail
for an other library, it would be a great shame for users (it would
surely be for me).
As an alternative I would suggest to settle a common review for the
three components, while leaving them all top level libraries. That would
resolve the issue of "partial approval" that Robert pointed out.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk