From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-10-05 20:19:38
On 10/5/20 10:22 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:12 AM Mateusz Loskot via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> TBH, I can't see it feasible to maintain lists of posts/threads.
> That is because you lack imagination.
> boost.org should have its own forum, instead of mailing lists. And
> when there is a formal review, the wizards create a subforum
> specifically for the review. Thus all posts and discussion relevant to
> the review will be categorized / organized into one subforum which
> after 3 months is then moved from "Recent Reviews" to "Archived
> Reviews" where they become available and viewable in perpetuity.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Actually, the Boost Library Incubator (www.blincubator.com) contains
exactly this facility. I made it some 5 years ago to support the review
process and to help library authors prepare their libraries for review.
I made it in word press because it seemed the easiest and I wanted to
learn more about web application development.
a) I was more or less happy with the result.
b) I found web development/tedious activity and couldn't really get
motivated to spend more time on it.
c) It originally has some issues with wordpress security - but those all
got addressed by upgrading to a better web provider.
d) I had decided to depend on wordpress components. This is in line
with the boost philosophy of "why make your when there's already a
better library". In general this was a good decision.
e) There are any number of word press components available. They are
easy to insert in to your application and easy to remove. BUT - most of
them are not really ready for prime time and it takes a lot of effort to
select, experiment with and validate components. I believe my average
was to get a pre-made component for one function, I had to test 5
components and reject 4. Still better than doing everything from
scratch - but still a pain. And if I have to reject four - how do I
know that the one I selected doesn't have any hidden quirks.
f) debugging was a big job. I found it very difficult to set up a test
website without creating some weird side effects. Then one needs a
system for setting up a "dynamic" path name. Probably could have found
it eventually ... but I'm not known for my patience.
g) Sooooo ... as a prototype www.blincubator.com was helpful. But as a
real solution, it would require more commitment than I could muster.
h) programming in PHP is ... terrible. It's like perl. Its one hack
after another. Debugging is even worse.
Probably there's a fix for all of this, but would require investment of
a lot more effort than I was willing to make. I did learn alot though -
the main thing is that I want to stay away from web development which is
basically a hack patching another hack invoked as a component of another
hack. It's basically hacks all the way down!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk