Re: [boost] [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10

On 7/5/2017 6:17 PM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:

...

You are saying that a library that is supposed to be reviewed for inclusion in Boost is supposed to somehow work outside of Boost ? I do not think so and can't even begin to understand that sort of logic.

Speaking for my own library Beast, I have developed a following of users over the lifetime of the library and these users aren't cloning the Beast repository into boost/libs/beast. They are getting it from vcpkg, git-subtree or git-submodule into their own repository, or cloning it out-of-tree.

It would be a poor experience if Beast did not build out-of-tree or if it required users to put files into their system provided Boost installation or to create their own Boost installation.

It was stated somewhere that Boost reviewers like to see instances of libraries that are already being used in practice. A library can work out-of-tree or it can be unpopular - pick one.

My comment immediately below is not referencing Beast per se, which I highly regard but about which I do not have enough programming knowledge in its particular domain to give an intelligent review. I am not arguing that you cannot make a library being reviewed for inclusion in Boost work outside of the Boost tree. I am arguing that you should make a library being reviewed for inclusion in Boost work in its normal place below the Boost libs subdirectory. I get a bit ticked when programmers who present there library for review can't be bothered with this. As a potential reviewer I do not want to go through contortions simply to be able to build a non-header only library, run tests for a library, or create local documentation for the library. No matter how brilliant a library might be if I can't clone that library below the libs directory and use normal Boost means to build the library or run the tests, as well as being given instructions for building the local docs if bjam is not being used to do so, I am not interested in that library at all just for starters.