Re: [boost] [variant] Maintainer

Subject: Re: [boost] [variant] Maintainer
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-29 06:19:44

On 29 Jun 2015 at 8:58, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:

> > Perhaps you'd wish to bring back the Sandbox 
> > (http://www.boost.org/community/sandbox.html), which has been 
> > superseded by standalone repositories since the move to Git.
>
> Yes, Boost.Experimental could be something like the old sandbox, but 
> instead of having a sandbox that is not fixed, it will be fixed 3 times 
> a year. This gives some stability to users that want to play with.

Does this mean that there would be an additional Boost tarball of all 
the Boost.Experimental libraries three times per year?

If you make it a rule that only Boost.Experimental libraries with a 
commit on their master branch within the last 12 months make it into 
that tarball, I wholeheartedly agree with this proposal.

One of the big problems with Sandbox used to be abandoned libraries, 
I would urge that Experimental not repeat that mistake. After all, if 
an Experimental library is popular or has an active maintainer it 
would surely receive at least one new commit on master branch in a 
year.

Vicente would you like to make a formal request for this on 
boost-steering? I will support you there. I would assume the main 
objectors would be the release managers, as it is additional work for 
them. They may request for new release managers to volunteer 
themselves just for Boost.Experimental.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/