But, if you're really interested in keeping Boost warning-free, you should put some effort into it. Run tests regularly, monitor changes, submit pull requests. Nothing is going to change unless someone interested acts. As I said, I think that there should be a monitoring system, together with an accepted general warning guideline. The right place to put this would be the boost build server. I will ask the package providers to create a pull request with their changes, and if they Don't have time to do so, I will create one.
Isn't it kind of ironic that every serious coding standard emphasizes that code should compile warning-free at the highest levels, but then the Boost libraries do not appraise this? Although I don't think that the quality is an issue, but it sets an interesting example. What I really don't like is that Boost makes it impossible for my code to compile the warning settings I want. What would you think of a STL delivered with your compiler that generates warnings? Cheers, Jens