Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer

Subject: Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer
From: Alexander Lamaison (awl03_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-22 16:30:57

Bjørn Roald <bjorn_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 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.

A lot of the old documentation is not useful for Boost.Test users, and
it swaps the bits that are useful.  For example, the first two chapters
are about the execution monitor and the program execution monitor, two
details that the Boost.Test users never need to know about.  Users have
to read to Part IV before they find out how to use the library in the
recommended manner.

Once you cut it down to size, you would result in what Richard has
written, albeit, less clearly worded.  That's why combining the two
would not be better: a major benefit of Richard's is the _absence_ of
documentation.

Alex

-- 
Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (http://www.swish-sftp.org)