Subject: Re: [boost] The problems with Boost development
From: Pierre Morcello (pmorcell-cppfrance_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-20 08:29:54
Just 2 problems from my (rather exterior) point of view:
1/ about reviews.
A review is often too many 'little issues' discussed at the same time. Some are interface related, other are implementation related.
From the experience of the ggl/boost.geometry review, I think the interface needs to be fixed before implementation can be discussed.
--> maybe an 'interface' review before a 'complete review - means code review-' would be more appropriate.
------> To submit to an 'interface' review, the library would need to be already complete though (docs + implementation), in order to make sure that 1/ the proposition is already solid 2/ technical problems which could impact the interface are already well spotted.
------> I did not do any review of boost.geometry/ggl for many reasons, one of them being that I felt I could not do a real review given that the documentation at least was not (at that time) enough for me to fully-understand the library.
--> that way expert of specific domains can focus on the implementation review when the documentation is correct and the interface satisfying. They can also check things from the interface review dicussion if needed.
--> I think much time and assle can be saved that way.
2/ The community seems to not be sure if boost should aim for research or production libraries.
--> It is not the same work.
--> If 'production' is wanted, then :
----> Maybe libraries could be tagged as 'research' or 'production'. 'production' would mean at least "maintenance release + API continuity" during 2 years for each version of such library.
----> Maybe another possibility is to have a 'production branch', which use only "production version" of such available libraries (sorry if this seems obvious/trivial...).
--> Personnaly, I consider boost as 'research' libraries. IMHO developing boost can be fun as long as it is research. Production libraries can be later inspired by these works, or be proposed on the personnal website of the authors of corresponding boost library. Please note that this last point is only my point of view.
Just my 2 cents!
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I've found it!), but 'That's funny...'"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk