Re: [boost] [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10

Subject: Re: [boost] [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-05 22:01:34

On 7/5/2017 12:26 PM, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 7/5/17 8:24 AM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
>> On 7/5/2017 12:25 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Glen Fernandes via Boost
>>> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> $ cd libs/smart_ptr/test
>>>
>>> Beast is not designed to build in-tree since it is not yet part of Boost
>>
>> Still the ideal of reviewing a library usually means that the library 
>> can be cloned beneath the Boost libs sub-directory and just "work", 
>> whether the library is part of Boost or not.
> 
> Hmmm - I'm not sure where that idea comes from.  It's certainly not in 
> the official requirements for a boost review.
> 
> And there is a bigger problem here.  When one puts his library "out 
> there" the hope is that people will use it and he will get feed back 
> from users, bug fixes etc.  But to make the library easy to use within 
> boost is to make it hard to use outside of boost. A library should "just 
> work" whether or not the user has boost installed or not. or whether he 
> is running as a subdirectory of boost or not.  Or whether he uses b2 or 
> not.

You are saying that a library that is supposed to be reviewed for 
inclusion in Boost is supposed to somehow work outside of Boost ? I do 
not think so and can't even begin to understand that sort of logic.

> 
> This is a continuing problem in making boost easier to use for users and 
> easier to start using.  We need to make changes to address this.
> 
> Robert Ramey