Re: [Boost] [Describe] Summary Review Summary

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-03-18 16:07:34

On 17/03/2021 18:02, Emil Dotchevski via Boost wrote:

> If your goal is standardization, convincing the users is utterly irrelevant
> to success. Worse, it is a lose-lose proposition, you might get one and a
> half stars on GitHub which doesn't look too good. I remember Niall giving
> (good) advice that if the goal is standardization, it is best to not bother
> with a Boost review, either: it adds a lot more work that is irrelevant to
> achieving your goal, plus you risk rejection which doesn't look too good.

That's not _quite_ what I advised, though it is close.

My advice was, and always has been, that the most valuable aspect of
Boost _to the library_ and its author is the peer review. A high quality
review is quite literally priceless - it cannot be bought for money.
It's why I get so annoyed when some proposers only care about getting
into Boost at all costs, that the review is only a hurdle which can be
beaten down using groupies, which feels to me an enormous wasted
opportunity to make the best C++ libraries possible.

In this aspect, Boost has been very good for me. Both of the libraries I
presented to Boost - AFIO and Outcome - both were completely
reimplemented and completely redesigned from the feedback received here.
I personally believe that the reason why WG21 has to date liked my
libraries so much is precisely because of those Boost reviews. So thank
you Boost!

What you may be remembering me saying Emil is that once you get the
review from Boost, the incentive to finish the library and get it into
Boost is low if your goal is standardisation. You can skip rewriting all
that documentation and tutorials and examples and having to deal with
real end users for the next two decades if you go straight from Boost
review to WG21 standards, skipping finishing your library sufficient for
Boost. Given the plethora of C++ package managers today including
github, Boost as a distribution vehicle is nothing like as important as
it once was, so all in all, the value added from shipping in Boost is a
fraction of what it was fifteen or twenty years ago.

I skipped Boost and went straight to WG21 with LLFIO, and I feel very
guilty about it. I did do the honourable thing for Outcome however. And
I'll never, ever, get another library into Boost again unless someone is
paying me to do it. Once is enough.

> As for convincing the committee, I don't think that's possible from the
> outside, much less on this platform.

Most of the senior committee skim reads this mailing list. Most read the
review manager summaries of new libraries in detail. Most of the big
names are here, watching. Just because they never, or very rarely, post
here doesn't mean they aren't reading.

I can definitely assure you that what goes here changes opinions and
persuades people on WG21. On many occasions I have discussed things
happening here at WG21 meetings. You all here just never see it, that's all.

Niall