Re: [boost] Boost Evolution

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Evolution
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-19 18:11:00

On 5/19/16 2:20 PM, Vladimir Batov wrote:
> On 05/20/2016 03:08 AM, Nevin Liber wrote:
>> On 17 May 2016 at 11:37, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> There is one big lesson from all this:
>>>
>>> a) Boost is not a company - we don't take direction from the top.
>>> b) Boost is not a government - we actually do something.
>>> c) Boost is a religion - want something changed, start preaching.  Get
>>> other people on board. Convince people people to start doing something.
>> Boost is not a religion.  It's a set of tools; no more, no less.
>
> Clearly Robert was metaphorically speaking and explained well what he
> meant -- "want something changed, start preaching"... Maybe a bit too
> strong but still...

LOL - not it's not.  The point is that Boost is not the hierarchical 
organization you're probably currently working it.  We don't take orders 
from the top and execute them.  We don't take our ideas up the chain and 
wait for someone to approve them and wait for them to come down again. 
Again, and again, something happens - like quickbook which gets invented 
and spreads horizontally.  This is why I think Naill's approach, 
difficulties resulted in so much frustration.  It pains me because I 
know he's worked hard on trying to make changes.  But on the other hand 
- look at eh GSOC program.  It seems to me he took more of the bottom up 
approach and was a lot more successful at it.  This is really what I mean.

And we can work this way because were motivated by passion.  How else 
could we sustain a discussion like this for days - (not that this is a 
good thing - it's just a fact).

So if you care about Boost/C++ and want to make better, it's best to 
understand how this works (or doesn't work).

Just my 2 cents.

Robert Ramey

>
>> ... in
>> some ways making a proposal directly to the committee is easier if you
>> want
>> to get your library out there: shorter commitment, only need one
>> implementation...
>
> I personally far from sure that's a good idea. IMO Boost has been an
> excellent (and essential) preparatory platform (and a safeguard) for
> potential/future std inclusion.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>