Subject: Re: [boost] [proposal] The boost.org Maintenance Effort
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-27 02:31:30
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> The VCR mentality has spread like a
> Okay, but Robert this is a generalization.
I admit I have my prejudices. There is one thing. The person who does the
work gets to decide how to do it. This is not so much as statement
of equity - but actually a statement of fact. Good luck to anyone
who takes this on. I'm sure everyone will be want to give a fair shot.
>> would like to see a discussion about the structure of a "new"
>> website before getting into the "tools". Of course I said most of
>> what I wanted to say about this subject in our discussion regarding
>> this subject at BoostCon.
> That sounds like a good discussion to have. If it wasn't clear in my
> proposal, I apologize -- what I wanted to achieve was something like
> - all about boost the community, the library collection, the
> process, the policies, the people
> - guidelines for the website, necessary disclaimers, etc.
> - a means for jumping to the individual library subdomains
> - blog
> - online documentation
> - support information
issue tracking, patches, proposed enhacements
> - discussions (?)
complaints, reviews, etc.
> - static pages (FAQ, History, etc.)
That looks close enough for government work.
>> The lack of a "unified" system will be found to be off putting to
>> some - but this methods lets Boost evolve as necessary.
> I agree 100%.
One thing that I believe is that each developer should be able
to select the build, test and deployment system(s) he want's to support.
For many simple libraries which are header only, a simple makefile
to build and run all the tests is all that is needed. Likewise, a simple
zip file is sufficient for deployment. While others need something more
elaborate. So I would like to defer these decisions to the developer.
This would make the web design/deployment, etc job smaller. It would
let ideas like rypll enter into the mix one library at a time.
On the other hand, I like the idea of a common look and feel - like
google search pages. That way everything is where I expect to find it
and it's easier to make comparisons. I hate it when every one has
their "cute" feature - like a 50MB rap video extolling the virtues of their
library. or whatever. This is perhaps too far ahead at this point -
but I can't resist the opportuntity to tell someone else how to do
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk