Re: Two mqtt libraries

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-05-20 18:05:09

On 5/20/24 8:28 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 11:27 AM Robert Ramey via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> 
> I have similar thoughts as you and until this year I had my own ideas about
> "what belongs in Boost." As there is no formal document or informal
> exposition offered by the Boost Libraries project website I evolved my own
> thinking as I am sure that others have done.
> 
> However, upon discussions with high reputable sources (basically Peter
> Dimov), the criteria for "what belongs in Boost" is that "a library is
> useful." Applying this metric, I would think that if both MQTT libraries
> are useful then they should both be reviewed with the potential for
> acceptance.

Since C++11 C++ standard committee accepted a large number of Boost 
libraries - thus fulfilling the original purpose of boost.  The question 
then arose - what should Boost do now?  Most successful organizations 
confront this problem.  No one who has invested significant effort in 
the original organization wants to just wind it down.  So the search for 
a new purpose is undertaken.  In many cases, no such new purpose is 
found and the organization just withers into irrelevancy (even though as 
an organization it could linger on forever - at least until the money 
runs out).  If it's a for profit organization, it's just killed off by 
lack of investors and customers.  This is one of the signature benefits 
of Capitalism.  Boost has been flailing around since that time looking 
for a new mission.  I'd suggest a mission statement like:

"The purpose of Boost is to encourage the development of useful quality 
C++ software not expected to be part of the C++ standard."

I think much of the current infrastructure we have - review process etc. 
is well suited to the above stated purpose.

I have a number of reservations about our development support aspects - 
website, build, documentation, etc. etc. which I've stated previously.

> 
> It really would be nice if there was some kind of documented rationale for
> what libraries belong in Boost as this would eliminate the speculation and
> guesswork.
> 
> Thanks

You're welcome.

Robert Ramey
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost