Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [http] Formal review of Boost.Http
From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-12 09:35:02

Oleg Grunin wrote:
> 1. "The very first sentence" was added today.
> 2. google 'boost best practices' search brings up your link at the very
> top.
> 3. Sophisticated or not, the last thing Boost needs is people being
> turned off by all the gobbledygook on it.

Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
> I'm happy with the newly added note claiming that those are your
> opinions and yours only. That way others won't feel the need to clarify
> that's not a Boost thing every single time you mention it. I'd really
> appreciate if you'd do something of the sort yourself in your upcoming
> emails.

I added the note[1], after Niall's e-mail, encouraged by his words about
editing the wiki. I believe Niall was referring to the "originally written
by Niall Douglas" sentence.

Niall: I hope the insertion of the note (and the removal of the word
"originally") is acceptable. I'm not as passionate about sharing ideas about
best practices in C++ as you are but it is important to me that
people interested in contributing to Boost are not mislead and think that
your document speaks for Boost, any Boost community member, or is mandate in
any way.


[1] No "employed full time permanent infrastructure and maintenance engineer
whose full time day job is to improve and keep up to date all the shared
infrastructure" was harmed in the writing of this note.

View this message in context:
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at