Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 20:36:06
On 15 May 2015 at 1:49, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> To me, the claim that 'about half (60) of boost libraries have no
> maintainer' together with the fact that, in general, the boost maintenance
> model does not like 'community maintained libraries' and the fact only 11
> libraries are listed in
I never claimed that.
I claimed that by the strictest assessment, about sixty libraries are
undermaintained. This might mean bugs open for more than five years,
unmerged pull requests for over a year, that sort of thing.
Some undermaintained libraries have active maintainers who commit new
code weekly or more. They may not send any of that to master branch,
and/or not bother with bug fixes in master branch.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk