Oleg Grunin wrote:
1. "The very first sentence" was added today. 2. google 'boost best practices' search brings up your link at the very top. 3. Sophisticated or not, the last thing Boost needs is people being turned off by all the gobbledygook on it.
Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
I'm happy with the newly added note claiming that those are your opinions and yours only. That way others won't feel the need to clarify that's not a Boost thing every single time you mention it. I'd really appreciate if you'd do something of the sort yourself in your upcoming emails.
I added the note[1], after Niall's e-mail, encouraged by his words about editing the wiki. I believe Niall was referring to the "originally written by Niall Douglas" sentence. Niall: I hope the insertion of the note (and the removal of the word "originally") is acceptable. I'm not as passionate about sharing ideas about best practices in C++ as you are but it is important to me that people interested in contributing to Boost are not mislead and think that your document speaks for Boost, any Boost community member, or is mandate in any way. Glen [1] No "employed full time permanent infrastructure and maintenance engineer whose full time day job is to improve and keep up to date all the shared infrastructure" was harmed in the writing of this note. -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/http-Formal-review-of-Boost-Http-tp467860... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.