Subject: Re: [boost] Once accepted, when does a library undergo further review?
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-08 18:01:15
On Jan 7, 2014, at 6:46 AM, "Niall Douglas" <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 6 Jan 2014 at 13:33, Nevin Liber wrote:
>>> Also, more controversial features, techniques or ideas which wouldn't pass peer review are deliberately kept till after admission.
>> Do you have an example of this?
> Well, I'm not going to name names when anyone interested can search this list's historical archives for when people complain loudly about changes. There is a library whose internals have seen a lot of recent and radical change, and it regularly breaks AFIO. I'm not alone in experiencing such breakage, but personally speaking I support such
> changes as they are a positive thing, even with the extra work they cause me in keeping up.
Changes, breaking or otherwise, are normal for an actively maintained library. That's hardly a case of "deliberately [keeping them] till after admission." What you described was quite different.
>> IMHO, this seems like it would be an abuse of the trust given to Boost developers.
> I would call it a *consequence* of the trust given to Boost
> developers. They earned that trust by achieving passing peer review, a no small feat.
Authors earn the right to modify their libraries, but that's not the same as saying they withhold controversial features until after the library's acceptance.
As you noted, the community can push back if things get out of hand. Also, a library can be forked if an interested group of people doesn't like the new direction an author takes.
(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