Subject: Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer
From: Richard (legalize+jeeves_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-19 18:55:02
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
Kim Barrett <kab.conundrums_at_[hidden]> asserted that the existing
detail in the documentation was useful and necessary and that somehow
I had done the library a disservice by removing detail.
Yet, when asked:
boost_at_[hidden] spake the secret code
>[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>boost_at_[hidden] spake the secret code
>>[...] So when I
>>hear someone suggesting that there is too much detail in the
>>Boost.Test documentation, and that some of it should be thrown away, I
>>get very nervous.
>Have you looked at my version of the documentation?
>What is missing from there that you feel needs to be documented?
I receive no response.
I can therefore only conclude that the new documentation isn't missing
anything that's necessary as I asked this question in February, almost
three months ago.
-- "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>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk