On Sat, May 18, 2024 at 11:27 AM Robert Ramey via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
...boost has discouraged the acceptance of multiple libraries with this much overlap - and for good reason. An accepted library often becomes the canonical implementation in large parts of the C++ world. Having two high quality libraries that do almost the same thing is not where we would like to be.
I have similar thoughts as you and until this year I had my own ideas about "what belongs in Boost." As there is no formal document or informal exposition offered by the Boost Libraries project website I evolved my own thinking as I am sure that others have done. However, upon discussions with high reputable sources (basically Peter Dimov), the criteria for "what belongs in Boost" is that "a library is useful." Applying this metric, I would think that if both MQTT libraries are useful then they should both be reviewed with the potential for acceptance. It really would be nice if there was some kind of documented rationale for what libraries belong in Boost as this would eliminate the speculation and guesswork. Thanks