Subject: Re: [boost] Boost summer of formal reviews
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-03-11 19:49:28
On 11 Mar 2014 at 16:08, Erik Erlandson wrote:
> > To get a willing peer review manager a library already needs to
> > become popular enough, so we already have that too. For example, not
> > enough people are using AFIO, therefore no one wants to peer review
> > manage it, therefore I agree AFIO should not enter Boost until it is
> > popular enough -
> This makes some sense, but... if it doesn't get into Boost, how does it
> become popular? As a policy, it's in danger of circular dependency:
> "AFIO never made it into Boost because it wasn't popular. It never got
> popular because it never made it into Boost..."
I'm not unsympathetic, certainly. But in open source there's always
an element of marketing and building reputation, and that's usually
down to spreading the word and finding a well recognised "famous"
user such as RedHat to publicly endorse a library etc.
After all, 2002-2006 I dropped 60k lines of C++ into TnFOX, yet no
one ever used it. A real waste of effort in some ways, but equally I
learned a ton load doing it, stuff I could never learn writing Boost
-- Currently unemployed and looking for work in Ireland. Work Portfolio: http://careers.stackoverflow.com/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk