Subject: Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer
From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-22 11:56:55
On 01/22/2014 12:13 PM, Tim Blechmann wrote:
> Vladimir wrote:
>> 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 ...
As far as what I understand, that is what Gennadiy offers. Richard's
offer was more along the line, "I will take over if you get out of my
way". At least that is what I interpreted. I would not be so eager for
a fork, unless there is no other way. It may be Gennadiy need help, and
he ask for help. Richard did not offer any help in this exchange at least.
As far as the documentation, I find it hard to understand why the
various views on the Library that Richards documentation and the
original documentation represent could not be integrated somehow to a
better total. However if the attitude is that we have new docs, get rid
of the old. Anybody see a pattern here? I have very little
understanding of how that should work to the better of Boost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk