Subject: Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-22 06:13:31
>> besides: competition often leads to better products, imo clang is the
>> best thing that happened to gcc ... i had my troubles with boost.test
>> myself, so also from the perspective of the user it would be very
>> helpful to have two libraries with a similar interface, which could be
>> exchanged by using a different namespace or macro prefix.
>> that said, i have no idea, why you strongly dislike richard's offer
> Presumable it is because Richard's offer -- which I trust was genuine
> offer of
> engineering help -- actually sounded like an offer to take over
> something that Gennadiy
> has spent years creating, over close to 900 commits. The resulting
> response was rather on
> the polite side, even.
there are quite a few boost libraries that are not actively maintained.
recently there was a discussion about a community maintenance team for
some libraries have even been orphaned before they had been merged into
the release branch.
> I don't know whether damage done in this thread, and in other exchanges
> about boost.test,
> can be undone :-(
sad, but true. though having more than one maintainer for a library
would be the best approach for a stable codebase ...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk