Subject: Re: [boost] Thoughts on Boost v2
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-22 08:21:30
On 5/22/2014 8:00 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 22 May 2014 at 6:48, james wrote:
>> From an outsider's perspective (ie use Boost) the conversation about
>> whether Boost is alive or dead or needs forking is a bit bizarre.
> I can see that. One of the big reasons I've been agitating - and I
> suspect why my agitations haven't been instantly dismissed - is that
> the stats are trending negative on almost every metric. There have
> also been some internal shocks to the org this past year such as Dave
> leaving, to which different people naturally have reacted
> differently. After all, Dave for many people including myself *is*
> Boost, he is why I was ever here at all, and I mourn his loss.
> There are much wider issues too though. Activity in open source has
> been trending downwards on every metric for two years now.
> Statistically that is the biggest explantory variable for Boost's
> decline - it's actually a decline in all open source. Nevertheless,
> we are still declining relative to all open source, and I think that
> is a surprise to people given the recent relative strength of C++.
It is very hard to take seriously the sort of generalities which you
propose. That, along with your propensity to make even greater
generalities about your own self, means that it is very hard for me to
take you seriously when you discuss things in such a manner.
Boost consists of 125+ libraries. Large-scale statements about Boost
mean very little when you realize that Boost is just an umbrella for a
great number of C++ implementations. My suggestion is that you would to
much better to tone down the doomsday messages and discuss the
individual Boost library or libraries in which you are interested.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk