On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Hartmut Kaiser
Frankly, I find it to be disturbing to see that the review manager appears to have come into this review with the predetermined decision to accept the library. But this is purely my impression, others might see it differently.
:-) I will again ask your indulgence to defer an opinion of my function as a review manager until I have posted my review report. If the community then feels that I have misrepresented their collective voice, that would be a good time to say so. I admit that I am "wearing two hats." As a Boost user I would like to see Boost adopt something that fits this ecological niche. Like you, we have code that I would love to replace with an official Boost library. As review manager, I will make a sincere attempt to collate and summarize the responses of those who have invested time and energy in this review. Isn't it often true that someone willing to serve as review manager for a Boost review has at least some interest in the subject library? Would it have improved matters if I had withheld my own opinion from the discussion? Remaining silent would not have made me more objective; it would merely have concealed my own bias. Openly stating my personal bias, in effect, gives me additional incentive to be careful and thorough in presenting the review results. Again, though, please withhold judgment until I have done so.