Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] C++ Standards Committee membership for Boost?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-25 06:31:16

on Thu May 10 2012, Nathan Ridge <> wrote:

>> From: mjklaim_at_[hidden]
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> > My definition of a "Booster" is anyone who has been participating in
>> > Boost, and the admittedly vague definition of "participating" is very
>> > broad, and goes far beyond library authors.
>> Wouldn't it be a problem for the C++ commitee?
>> My understanding it that the mailing list is voluntarily kept closed to
>> avoid
>> a lot of problem like trolling or out-of-scope subjects that occur
>> naturally in
>> open communities (even boost). I might be wrong, I didn't read any official
>> info about this.
>> But allowing this large definition of boosters to be able to mail the
>> C++ committee mailing list
>> would then open a breach for them, wouldn't it?
> Not everyone agrees with the closed nature of the committee mailing lists.

And there's some indication that said nature may be changing. Stay

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at