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

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: charleyb123 . (charleyb123_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-15 23:21:47

Michael Ainsworth spaketh:
> <snip>,
> On a related topic, there are a number of libraries that haven't been
> accepted into Boost which have Boost in their name, (perhaps
> unintentionally) implying that they have been accepted. It'd be good if the
> Boost community made a ruling that future library submissions include in
> their name (and C++ namespaces) "Booster"/"Boostable"/some-other-variant, so
> as to indicate it's "not yet official" status. Once accepted, a simple find
> and replace would be required to reflect the status change.

I think this is a very good idea -- reserving the "Boost" name for
libraries actually accepted to Boost.

Perhaps we could establish a convention.  For example, the Qt
community labels "playground/speculative" projects with a "Qt" prefix
(such as "QtSomeLib"), and after acceptance into Qt, they drop the "t"
(and the fully accepted-and-supported library becomes "QSomeLib").