Re: Do Tools Need Formal Reviews?

From: Christian Mazakas (christian.mazakas_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-10-09 15:32:12

On 10/8/24 3:39 PM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> Traditionally, tools used by authors and maintainers are quietly integrated
> with oversight from owners and release managers. Examples include saxon-he
> and docca (https://github.com/boostorg/docca). Recently there have been
> noises made expressing the desire for the formal review process to be
> applied to tools as well. The purpose of this post is to explain why this
> is a bad idea.

I don't think it's a good idea in general for authors  to have carte 
blanche to add whatever tools they want to Boost because it _does_ 
affect others in the project.

Complicating the Boost development toolchain without approval seems to 
fly in the spirit of fraternity that underpins Boost.

I was also under the impression that Dmitry's tool would be user-facing. 
We've had nothing but popular reception about more debugger support and 
I think users would be interested in anything that helps them abstract this.

- Christian