On 11/10/2018 16:36, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
There are issues which are years old which have been lingering in the Boost.Asio repository, and there are also old issues in the stand-alone Asio repository. It seems like these are being ignored, is there any strategy for addressing this?
Examples:
This one is going on a year: https://github.com/boostorg/asio/issues/77
I think it is fair to say from the commit history of Asio and the huge amount of work that has gone into modifying and enhancing the library to keep it in sync with the Networking TS that it is, in fact, being actively maintained. Some issues like #77 are in fact fixed, but the ticket hasn't been closed. (I guess there are multiple places now where issues get raised to add to the excitement). In an ideal world I'm sure we'd all be really good at that, but given the huge importance of Asio to the C++ language in general, no doubt some sort of time trade-off was made to prioritise that work over pure issue hygiene?
Certainly an interesting example but also a somewhat complex feature request that brings with it a number of trade-off decisions that, (sadly for some) means this presumably is a lower priority than other Asio work - like the Networking TS and the many useful and significant updates that have been made to support that, not to mention Executors... Also from your contributions to the issue it looks like there is a work-around implemented for a primary use-case (Beast) making this less of a priority potentially. Honestly as heavy user of Boost I sympathise with the sentiment, but I think it is a real stretch, not to mention very unfair to the author and maintainer of the library, to fire out a message like this that seems to suggest Asio is not being actively maintained, or that there is some pressing issue that needs to be addressed.
Thanks
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost