Re: [boost] Best Practice Handbook [was Formal review of Boost.Http]

Subject: Re: [boost] Best Practice Handbook [was Formal review of Boost.Http]
From: Agustín K-ballo Bergé (kaballo86_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-08-12 15:40:32

On 8/12/2015 12:27 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2015 at 9:49, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
>
>>> The very first sentence makes it very clear it is not a Boost blessed
>>> document.
>>
>> 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.
>
> Secondly I'm not going to write a disclaimer every single time I
> refer to that handbook as it's a shared document editable by anyone.
> It's there precisely to save wasted time writing the same email over
> and over again. It's there to help library authors get a head start
> on getting their library Boost-ready. Why would you disclaim with a
> warning every time you link to the Boost wiki?

The potential for perceiving the Best Practice Handbook as a Boost 
document is what lead others to feel the need to clarify the situation.
Since I don't think the intention is to mislead people into taking that 
document as Boost's Best Practice Handbook just for being in Boost's 
wiki, I'd appreciate any and all efforts to mitigate that. Though as I 
said, I am happy with (just) the note.

>>> [snip]
>>
>> I did not read the rest of the message, I'm sorry if you spent any of
>> your family time on it. I'm sure you'll understand though, as I too have
>> family.
>
> You might want to consider your tone. That was a real passive
> aggressive dick thing to say. I invest considerable unpaid effort
> into writing email, and it's a difficult choice when I would prefer
> to kick a ball with my child instead. You don't have to read what I
> write, but trivialising the fact I wasted my family time to reply to
> your mean spirited whining isn't on.

I did not mean to trivialize your time nor how you use it, my apologies 
if it seems that way. You say it best, I do not have to read what you 
write, but I have asked you in the past to consider the time it takes 
others to read your messages as important as the time it takes you to 
write them, so for this unadorned effective reply I thank you.

Regards,
-- 
Agustín K-ballo Bergé.-
http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com