Re: [boost] Guidelines on wiki

Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines on wiki
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-28 14:57:08

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul A. Bristow" <pbristow_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines on wiki

> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Daniel James
>> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 1:18 PM
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [boost] Guidelines on wiki
>> 
>> On 26 March 2010 12:33, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> > Daniel:
>> >>
>> >> Hopefully people with subversion access will be disciplined. But I
>> >> think you're right, it should be someone's responsibility to oversee
>> >> the wiki and keep things ordered. I think this page demonstrates that:
>> >>
>> >> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/Guidelines/MaintenanceGuidelines
>> >
>> > It that a compliment or not ;-)
>> >
>> > (I'm sure it can still be improved!)
>> 
>> I wasn't commenting on any of the content, but the page is a bit of a
>> mish-mash, it needs a coherent focus. The 'user guidelines' are
>> probably out of place, since users aren't involved in maintenance. 

You are right. These guidelines concerns more how the user can avoid breaking his code when boost evolves, and what s/he can do to improve regression tests.

>I
>> also don't understand why there are 'developer guidelines' and
>> 'booster guidelines' (what's the difference?).

Please, note that these guidelines have not been reviewed.
I used the word 'developer' for authors or maintainers. The 'boosters' intendeed any member of the Boost community that can check that the released code follows the maintenance guidelines. 
 
>> In the contents, 'Managing Warnings from Compilers' looks like a small
>> subsection, but is actually half the document. It should probably be
>> moved into a 'how to deal with warnings' article (not under
>> guidelines), with a shorter, more general guideline on this page that
>> would link to the article.
> 
> Agreed - It has just 'growded like Topsy':
> 
> it needs an editor, guided by feedback, to keep it in some short of shape.
> 
> (But that should not stop others making changes - still a wiki).
> 
> Most people are polite enough to say "I've amplified/changed/deleted the section on ... - is this OK"?

Paul, would you like to take care of separating the Managing Warnings from Compilers section?

Best,
Vicente