-----Original Message----- From: Boost-users [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Robert Ramey Sent: 25 August 2015 20:20 To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [boost] [afio] Formal review of Boost.AFIO
On 8/25/15 4:37 AM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
IMO what we are deciding is if we want this software to be developed > and maintained, not, as some mistakenly imagine, if it is finished > > and complete ready to go into the 1.60 release. It isn't and won't be > until 1.61 at the very earliest, and will still be modified after > > > release because
It is using cutting edge tools.
It is breaking new ground and will be changes by C++ Standard, Library and compiler changes.
Personally, I don't believe that Incubator is the right way to speed > development of this software.
Hmmm - why not?
I think it will never take off until 'official'. That is most unreasonable, but a fact of life.
I think we need to alter the Boost review and acceptance process.
In what way?
Having two 'status' flags: * mature and 'standard' - stable and bug-free (we hope). * 'experimental' - usable but still be being improved. The C++ Standards people have started to accept the need for 'experimental' status. (Of course, the 'status' is really a continuum, not a bool). My main reason is that I believe that people won't use libraries until they are in the release. And without lots of users ("first encounter with the enemy") , you don't find if things are really useful or not. IMO, too many Boost reviews are by far too few people and with too little real-life use. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830