Subject: Re: [boost] [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB (license changed to BSL)?
From: Christian Holmquist (c.holmquist_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-10 21:27:54
> > >
> > Extremely useful.
> > I guess it needs to be boostified before it will pass a review though.
> > - Christian
> I understand this procedure... But rather I would ask a question.
> When and how it would go to review.
> My current situation:
> - Boost.Locale - I currently maintain two versions: CppCMS's one
> and Boost one - because I need it and on the other side it is not in
> - It is stuck in the review queue for about half a year.
> - I did big boostification effort and I pay for it.
> So should I do same mistake with CppDB and wait for another year to get
> it reviewed and maintain two versions?
> Good question.
Understood, that seems far from optimal.
I kind of took for granted that libraries must be boostified before
submitted for review, but does such a policy actually exist?
The problem with lack of review managers has been going on for a while, how
about this (already suggested maybe?):
Split the review manager into two positions:
* Responsible person 1 - Has knowledge on Boost's infrastructure, such as,
tools, documentation, test and other best practices that should be followed
by all libraries. Has enough background in boost to make a sound judgement
when the review ends based on the discussions, without getting into the
gritty details of the code or domain at hand.
* Responsible person 2 - Has knowledge about the domain and will take more
active part in guiding the library towards boost's standards in terms of
generic programming etc..
I think it is difficult to find people that are comfortable in both the
above, which I assume they have to be to act as a review manager?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk