Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite

Subject: Re: [boost] Call for Review: Boost.Test documentation rewrite
From: Richard (legalize+jeeves_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-10 14:53:46

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

boost_at_[hidden] spake the secret code
<loom.20140110T173138-224_at_[hidden]> thusly:

>I am all for working with Richard on new docs. I am just not sure this 
>particular version worth time people will need to spent to get used to it. 
>What Boost.Test really need is to document new release. And this is what we 
>should be targeting. New features and new docs look and feel will make it 
>all worth while.

Again, I'm not sure why you didn't reply to my call for reviewers that
I posted last May.

You're saying I ignored you, but when I email you or post to the
mailing list, you don't reply.

I've posted here on this mailing list with an open call for reviewers
and 4 people responded and I've been sending those 4 people regular
snapshots for many months.

<shrug>

I just don't find that you're being helpful while at the same time
blaming me for not doing what you want.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>