On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 4:32 AM John Maddock via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
We need to move along with the this.
I get the sense that they are at least pointed in the right direction, which is a good thing. And there is a mismatch in cadence, which is challenging for me as I like to move fast. The counterclaim is that this is volunteer work, which is also true. There could be value in thinking about which aspects of the project have activity levels as a bottleneck. For example, there are two separate MQTT libraries currently proposed. The community determined that a single review to evaluate two proposals together was not appropriate, yet no decision has been made as to an alternative method for review. A potentially useful library is now sidelined, with its author in limbo. This harms the reputation of the project, and there should be a discussion on how our process might be updated to better serve the reviews. Thanks