Subject: Re: [boost] Removing old config macro and increasing compiler requirements.
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-04 06:47:38
On Aug 4, 2013, at 5:51 AM, Stephen Kelly <steveire_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 08/04/2013 10:57 AM, Daniel James wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Aug 2013, at 10:22 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>> What do you think about increasing the compiler requirement much more,
>>> as I wrote in another mail?
>> I'd say no, unless you've got a very good reason. Compiler support should be an individual library maintainers decision.
> Thanks for bringing that up. I was hoping someone would :). I've been reading the boost mailing list for a while and I've seen similar sentiments that each maintainer can make somewhat autonomous decisions on things like this.
We generally favor library-specific decisions when reasonable.
> That obviously does not help with forward momentum
> in efforts like this, and I expect the boost community has a solution to that problem.
When it becomes necessary to make a decision that affects multiple libraries, we try to gain consensus on this list. If there is a person or group with authority over the aspect under discussion, like the Release Managers or Review Wizards, they would decide.
> Is the solution the steering committee?
The Steering Committee would only get involved when a decision is required and the foregoing options fail to render an acceptable decision.
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk