Subject: Re: [boost] C++ Standards Committee membership for Boost?
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-10 13:06:17
Beman Dawes wrote:
> The relationship between Boost and the C++ Standards Committee has
> been strictly informal. That's been fine, particularly given that most
> Boost moderators were members of the standards committee and regularly
> attended meetings. As the standards committee gears up to accept
> library proposals, the relationship is getting even closer.
> I believe it would be advantageous for Boost to join the C++ committee
> as a voting member.
> The advantages of joining include:
> * We get to participate in formal votes. Right now, we only
> participate in straw votes.
> * Psychologically, it may give us a bit more weight in committee
> Comments? Opinions?
Hmmm - wouldn't this mean that we'd have to form some
consensus amongst ourselves as to how to vote? And don't
we already have enough to argue about given, build systems,
revision control systems, modularization, reviews, etc. etc.
Don't we have all the influence we really need already? Most
(if not all) of libraries added to the standard came from boost
and use the boost version as a reference implementation. And I
would hope that the commitee wouldn't add a new library
to the standard without have a reference implementation in hand.
I have to confess I don't understand the motivation behind a lot of
the commitee does, so getting people like me sucked into
the discussion (even indirectly) might turn out to be regretable.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk