Re: [boost] [proposal] The boost.org Maintenance Effort

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
>> cancer.
>>
>
> 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.

>> I
>> 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
> this:
>
>  www.boost.org
>    - 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
>  <library>.boost.org
>    - 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
his job.

Robert Ramey