Re: Technical Excellence?

From: Marcelo Zimbres Silva (mzimbres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-03-27 15:22:51

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 at 14:47, Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
> Boost libraries used to be cutting edge, to such an extent that they
> were adopted into the C++ Standard. And now the progress is in
> reverse. The Standard introduces a new component, and the Boost
> library follows (Boost.Charconv for example).

It is simpler now for most people to just write papers than a complete,
documented, unit-tested library and then engaging in a Boost review.

With this role change Boost becomes specially attractive to libraries that
won't find their way in to the standard, such as Boost.Redis, Boost.MySql
etc.

> In other cases I see libraries with few to no users limping into
> reviews, or absent discussions which question whether or not the bar
> for excellence is exceeded.

It is hard to know how many users a library has, specially if the docs are
great and the library has no bugs. Most users won't even let a star on
github.

> What is the criteria for determining if a library is good enough to become
> part of the collection?

The review process? This is why it so important to have a qualified review
manager.

Marcelo