Subject: Re: [boost] ASIO does not fully support Windows Runtime (WinRT), and a suggestion for providing support
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-15 17:37:15
On 1/15/2015 4:25 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 15 Jan 2015 at 12:42, Edward Diener wrote:
>> I highly object to the tone of your response. Bringing up a matter on
>> this mailing list related to a Boost library is not a command for anyone
>> to do anything. By responding the way you have done you are discouraging
>> people with issues from using Boost mailing lists to start a discussion
>> about a particular library.
> I apologise if I have offended anyone on the list, including you
> However, there is an etiquette when dealing with deficiencies in open
> source libraries. You first raise the issue with the library's
> maintainers before going onto public lists - and before I replied to
> the OP, I checked the github ASIO issue tracker and the Boost issue
> tracker and found no mention of the deficiencies.
I do not know of anything within Boost which says that library
maintainers are supposed to be contacted directly before one posts
issues on the mailing lists. In fact I have always assumed that the
mailing lists were the correct way to first bring up an issue and only
if there was no response from anybody connected with the library in
question does one then attempt to go further. Regardless of how this
normally occurs please realize that the mailing lists are completely
viable ways of alerting library maintainers to issues regarding their
library, with the protocol normally being that the OP should have the
form of "[library] Some Subject" as the subject of the mailing list post.
I hope you also realize that programmers who use Boost, and who are not
contributors themselves to Boost libraries, do occasionally send mailing
lists messages to the developers mailing list and do not know anything
about supposed etiquettes about suggested changes to a library. They are
simple bringing up issues and assume the mailing lists are one way to do
this, which they in fact are.
Of course programmmers can file bug and/or suggestion reports on Boost
trac or issue pull requests for changes on Github. But I would actually
expect attempting to directly contact a library developer is a thing a
programmer would do only as a last resort, if other things met little or
Like you I also viewed the OP as a very large request and or suggestion.
But a library maintainer has every right to respond as he sees fit, one
of those responses being that whatever changes which are being asked for
he is unwilling to implement for his own given reasons. But certainly
nobody should come down on anyone bringing up an issue regarding a
library on this mailing list unless the post is insulting or derogatory
to that library for personal reasons. That certainly was not the case in
any respect in the OP.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk