Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: Stephen Kelly (hello_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 20:10:55

Steven Watanabe wrote:

> On 05/14/2015 05:49 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> 
>> It also points to the question 'should Boost move more-consciously toward
>> a community maintenance model?', even if only for some libraries. It
>> appears to be what is happening *anyway* without intervention.
>> 
> 
> It would be utterly pointless to intentionally
> try to move to such a model, when the CMT is
> understaffed to handle the libraries we already own.
> It's better to have a library owned by the CMT
> than by no-one, but it's definitely not ideal.

I didn't say it's ideal - I said it's happening *anyway* without 
intervention.

If you want something 'ideal', then

* awareness of what the current state actually is, and 
* awareness of what is happening anyway 

can only help.

Your claim that what is happening *anyway* without intervention is 'not 
good' is a very important claim. Now that you know that something 'not good' 
is happening, do you think it's important to know that fact?

Thanks,

Steve.