Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review queue] Proposed new policy to enter the review queue
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-17 13:29:03

On 17/03/2017 13:19, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Just looking at it from a more outside point of view I would say:
>>> The Boost website does not look sexy.
>>> It looks quite old-fashioned, has a lot of text, but how that is
>>> structured is not easy to grasp by a short glimpse. And except for
>>> finding the current download and the list of current libraries it is
>>> quite hard to find particular information fast (if at all). (The GSOC)
>> You'll find plenty of this already reported in depth by me in posts
>> past. I believe there was even a C++ Now talk or two by me on this
>> topic. Most of current Boost infrastructure stopped being developed
>> further from about 2009 onwards mainly due to a mix of lack of
>> volunteers to do the work, and because any attempt to make any
>> significant changes to infrastructure runs into major admin hurdles.
> It'd be nice if stuff like this could be tracked in the (an?) issue
> tracker such that all discussion can be read in a single location.

Ah, but that's the chicken and egg problem: Infrastructure to track
discussion of the lack of infrastructure.

I will say that searching the mailing list archives and a bit of time
yields much fruit, indeed I remember doing up a timeline of "Boost
epochs" for my C++ Now talk. The infrastructure problem has been
discussed endlessly for a very long time now.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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