- Boost - lists.boost.org

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Vinnie Falco 27 Apr '23

27 Apr '23

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 7:56 AM Robert Ramey via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > Boost has a history making it's own tools: > ... > It's not a great history. In fact, I spend more time getting boost > tools to work than I do working on boost software. The difference here is that our efforts are powered by staff engineers who draw a salary and external corporations who have, as a condition of payment, the accomplishment of our goals. Thanks

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Vinnie Falco 27 Apr '23

27 Apr '23

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 7:56 AM Robert Ramey via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > I fail to see what is to be gained by replacing the current system. The current system is not being "replaced" it is being enhanced, with the OPTION (but not the requirement) to interact with the mailing lists using a modern, forum-based interface. Just as there are folks who have expressed that they would not participate in Boost discussions outside of the mailing list interface, there are as many (or more) people who have expressed that they will not interact with Boost through the mailing list at all. You don't hear from them because well, they don't post to the list (the dog that didn't bark). You ask, what is to be gained? Well, the largest existential threat to Boost is that we do not refresh the foundations of our social technology and our membership. Library membership in Boost no longer carries the cachet that it used to. Authors of new libraries increasingly prefer to go directly to the C++ standard instead of being thoroughly vetted in a Boost review. If we want to continue to maintain Boost's extraordinary relevance, we must do the following: 1. Make the mailing list more appealing to younger generations (millenials and the TikTok youths) 2. Increase participation in the Boost Formal Review process 3. Spark the imagination of the new generations of library authors - to write new libraries - to submit their libraries to Boost for review - to become active maintainers upon acceptance 4. Inspire people to contribute to Boost - by using the libraries, and providing feedback - by contributing to individual projects - by helping with documentation - by helping other users with questions or problems The mailing lists must never go away, for as long as there are even a few people who prefer them. But this cannot be the sole method to participate in the Boost social space. To stay current we must provide additional choices. The need for a forum interface is obvious. Thanks

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Robert Ramey 27 Apr '23

27 Apr '23

On 4/26/23 8:02 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: > - No existing solution meets our needs, so we have to write it ourselves The above sentence is a huge red flag. Boost has a history making it's own tools: a) documentation chain b) build system - Bjam c) build system - CMake integration c) CI d) GitHub integration d) probably some others I forgot It's not a great history. In fact, I spend more time getting boost tools to work than I do working on boost software. Like most computer projects, it turns out to be a lot of work which drags on forever and is constantly fiddled with to make work. When the work becomes tedious enthusiasm peters out and were stuck with something that "can be made to work". I fail to see what is to be gained by replacing the current system. Robert Ramey

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Gavin Lambert 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

On 27/04/2023 08:40, Robert Ramey wrote: > I use a threaded email reader - Thunderbird. > > I get my mailing list posts via a news reader. > > This is a perfectly wonderful setup and I'd be loath to change it. +1 on all three points. Via gmane, specifically. Thus far a newsreader has been the only successful way I can follow a community -- flat mailing lists are too disjointed and hard to follow context, and websites are "out of sight, out of mind"; I might keep up for a few weeks but inevitably forget for a while and then I'm 1k messages behind and I just ignore it forever.

1 0

proposal Multi multidimensional array library
by Alfredo Correa 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

Hi all, My name is Alfredo. I would like to propose this library called Multi for inclusion in Boost. Multi is a container and views library for (dynamic) multidimensional arrays. The library is available here, https://gitlab.com/correaa/boost-multi. The Boost prefix is purely aspirational at this point, of course. As I understand the process, the important step at this point is to find someone(s) to endorse the library and later a review manager. If you want to be an endorser, please let me know. If anyone has feedback or tips to prepare it for a review, please let me know as well. I will be at the Aspen CPPNOW conference if someone wants to discuss it in person. I am in the C++ Slack channel #boost for discussions as well. Here is a link to try it quickly online https://godbolt.org/z/KerbxW6WK. Thank you, Alfredo

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Robert Ramey 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

On 4/26/23 7:08 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: > Before we replace the mailing list with a forum (and implement a mail > gateway) can I get feedback on how you use the mailing list from your > email client? > > Are you using a threaded e-mail reader? If so, do you care if > discussions are changed to be flat (like Discourse)? What is important > to you (besides that you can continue to use your email client)? > I use a threaded email reader - Thunderbird. I get my mailing list posts via a news reader. This is a perfectly wonderful setup and I'd be loath to change it. Robert Ramey

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Mateusz Loskot 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 19:26, Nikita Kniazev via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > There is GitHub Discussion. What is wrong to enable Discussions on > https://github.com/boostorg/boost and use it? Indeed, why not try GitHub Discussions as a new space to evaluate interest in a Web-based forum. I'm happy with the current mailman, but if any migration is considered, then IMHO it should improve integration of comm, and not distribute it further. I'm not saying I'm a die-hard fan of GHD, but I am willing to trade some of my personal preferences for single place I go to. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Mateusz Loskot 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 16:08, Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > Are you using a threaded e-mail reader? Gmail, flat. I occasionally appreciate threaded view on lists.boost.org. > What is important to you (besides that you can continue to use your email client)? Usable search. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Nikita Kniazev 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

> Are you using a threaded e-mail reader? If so, do you care if discussions are changed to be flat (like Discourse)? I use Gmail which I think supports threads, but I subscribed to digests so no threads for me. > as no one in their twenties or earlier wants to use a mailing list I'm not from that demographic but I also don't want to use mailing lists. But I'm not a fan of 'forums' either. > What is important to you (besides that you can continue to use your email client)? 1. Main reason why I can't use the mail list: I don't want to subscribe to everything happening there. Probably there are email clients that make that easier, but that already excludes people who don't use such a client. 2. I subscribed to a digest and there is still no way to post to a thread without being subscribed to the mail list before it had been started. And even for one who had been subscribed it gives a wrong address to post to. 3. There is no way to link a post or thread. Inside the mail list itself or anywhere else. What are the options for a person who is not on the mail list? https://lists.boost.org? https://lists.boost.org is a user experience nightmare: 1. You can't post, only may create a new thread by mailing to the mail list. 2. You have to click on every message to read it. 3. In a threaded view you also can see only one message at a time, and it is easy to miss parts of the thread by clicking the wrong button. 4. Google and other search engines for some reason have indexing issues with it. Even if I know something was on the mail list or there is a comment in Boost's code with a link to a dead Gmane I had great luck finding absolutely nothing with multiple web search engines. 5. There is no code snippet syntax highlighting. 6. It doesn't interact with itself, or anything else either. > implement our own web-based forum I don't think it's a good idea. > The other alternative is to do a clean break and deploy something completely new, which would be Discourse. The downside of Discourse is that it does not support threaded discussions, and because of their philosophical objection to hierarchical conversations >From my experience with Discourse a post will contain a list of replies to it which you can jump back and forth. I don't see a great value in highly branched discussions, it is impossible to follow even on things like Hacker News or Reddit, just create a new thread. And... There is GitHub Discussion. What is wrong to enable Discussions on https://github.com/boostorg/boost and use it? AFAIK it supports posting from a mail client and subscribing to it to receive everything or just subscribed threads by emails? > * Written in Ruby, a dying language GitHub is written in Ruby :-)

1 0

Re: [boost] Replacing the ML with a forum
by Niall Douglas 26 Apr '23

26 Apr '23

On 26/04/2023 15:43, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 7:12 AM Marshall Clow via Boost > <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: >>> Are you using a threaded e-mail reader? If so, do you care if >>> discussions are changed to be flat (like Discourse)? >> >> Yes, and Yes. > > The current situation is this. For various reasons, we have no forum > for the new website. And a new forum is crucial for attracting new > people, as no one in their twenties or earlier wants to use a mailing > list. Twenty somethings don't use discussion forums either. Too passe. Re: Implementation last time this was discussed here and options investigated we found that https://fossil-scm.org/forum/forum implemented a web discussion forum with mailing list interface. One could use either interface, they were equivalent, and the UI seemed to meet approval here. I remember there were also other web discussion forum implementations with mailing list interface, but Fossil was the least unacceptable of them according to here, back in the day. Now, as to whether it could be improved upon, surely yes. However ever since Google stopped indexing discussion forms, I don't think they're the draw of users that they were. Nowadays if you can't find it on TikTok, it doesn't really exist for the under thirties. Niall

1 0