pt., 15 mar 2024 o 22:09 Zach Laine via Boost napisał(a):

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 4:00 PM Marshall Clow wrote:

...

The review of Zach's parser library ran from Feburary 19 -> 28th.

If I have mischaracerized/incorrectly stated anyone's position, please let me know in this thread.

REVIEW RESULT -----------------------------

The result is Boost.Parser is * ACCEPTED WITH CONDITIONS * into Boost.

This is great news!

Thanks to everyone for their participation in the review. I especially want to thank Marshall for managing the review, and Andrzej for burying me under tickets on Github. :) Andrzej, the library is vastly better for your efforts.

Zach, Congratulations on getting Boost.Parser accepted! Also thanks to Marshall and all the reviewers for devoting their time for the review process. BTW, I appreciate Marshall's reminders months before the review. This gave me the time to actually prepare for the review ahead of time. I have always found the 10 day period to be too short for detailed research and discussion. Regards, &rzej;

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 7:15 PM Vinnie Falco via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 2:01 PM Marshall Clow via Boost wrote:

...

The result is Boost.Parser is * ACCEPTED WITH CONDITIONS * into Boost.

We have announced the acceptance along with the custom artwork that our artist created for the library here:

https://twitter.com/boostlibraries/status/1768774074652647659

If someone who controls the Boost_Libraries X account could please repost or copy the message, that would be great.

So now you've created a new @BoostLibraries twitter feed instead of using the normal process of getting it listed on the existing @Boost_Libraries one? Wow. Just...wow.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 11:39 PM Vinnie Falco wrote:

[Y]ou revoked my TweetDeck access to the Boost_Libraries X account

This is a lie. You know it is a lie, and it can be proven. I'm done with this conversation.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:49 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:

Boost_Libraries, an account controlled entirely by one person: you.

Also false.

David Sankel wrote:

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:49 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:

...

Boost_Libraries, an account controlled entirely by one person: you.

Also false.

I have to admit that I always found the @Boost_Libraries Twitter account somewhat of a mystery. Tweets would occasionally emanate from it, but I could discern no underlying logic as to when they would appear and what they would announce; and if I remember correctly, I once tried to figure out who actually operated it by asking around, but without success. (To be clear, this was in the past.) Now, I'm generally supportive of us keeping our old ways, because they got us where we are, but in this specific case, I don't think our old ways ever worked that well. Maybe we need to address this by having a page on boost.org that lists our social media accounts, who is operating them, and on what basis; that is, what is the mandate given to their operators by the community. Or in other words, what are they supposed to tweet, and when. This "you are in sole control of the account" "no, you are a liar, I'm not the only one, but I won't tell you who the others are" business does not exactly benefit anyone, in my opinion. A bit more clarity and transparency is in order.

John Maddock wrote:

If we're going to have social media accounts, then we should probably run the full gamut of FB, X etc...

I personally don't care about anything else besides X/Twitter, but if we're going to have others as well (e.g. Linkedin), then it should be clear who's in control of them, too.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 8:02 AM Glen Fernandes wrote:

The "social" part always felt low brow. Like dancing at an assembly. You know... "in vogue amongst the less polished societies of the world" and all.

I forgot to say the important part: I'm in favor of names being associated with any social media accounts or posts because it would give me peace that the name "Glen Fernandes" would not be associated with them. Glen

I forgot to say the important part: I'm in favor of names being associated with any social media accounts or posts because it would give me peace that the name "Glen Fernandes" would not be associated with them.

Thank you, best laugh I've had all day.  I'm actually pretty surprised that we have a twitter/X account at all, but you know, grumpy old programmer speaking here, the youngsters might use them and all that ;) John.

El 16/03/2024 a las 12:15, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:49 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:

...

Boost_Libraries, an account controlled entirely by one person: you.

Also false. I have to admit that I always found the @Boost_Libraries Twitter account somewhat of a mystery. Tweets would occasionally emanate from it, but I could discern no underlying logic as to when

David Sankel wrote: they would appear and what they would announce; and if I remember correctly, I once tried to figure out who actually operated it by asking around, but without success.

FWIW, this is the protocol I wrote in the proposed new website for tweet requests (TL;DR they go through David Sankel for him to publish): https://www.boost.io/doc/contributor-guide/tweeting.html I started contributing to Boost back in 2003 and I think I have a decent grasp of the project and the community. I believe there are huge PR possibilities and so began being more active on X and Reddit (most of the recent publications in both services came actually from me). In all modesty I think the response has been generally good. If the community gives me this honor I’d be happy to have write access to the X account so that I can be even more active there. Joaquín M López Muñoz

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 9:29 AM Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:

El 16/03/2024 a las 12:15, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...

...

On Sat, Mar 16, 2024 at 12:49 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:

...

Boost_Libraries, an account controlled entirely by one person: you.

Also false. I have to admit that I always found the @Boost_Libraries Twitter account somewhat of a mystery. Tweets would occasionally emanate from it, but I could discern no underlying logic as to when

David Sankel wrote: they would appear and what they would announce; and if I remember correctly, I once tried to figure out who actually operated it by asking around, but without success.

FWIW, this is the protocol I wrote in the proposed new website for tweet requests (TL;DR they go through David Sankel for him to publish):

https://www.boost.io/doc/contributor-guide/tweeting.html

I started contributing to Boost back in 2003 and I think I have a decent grasp of the project and the community. I believe there are huge PR possibilities and so began being more active on X and Reddit (most of the recent publications in both services came actually from me). In all modesty I think the response has been generally good. If the community gives me this honor I’d be happy to have write access to the X account so that I can be even more active there.

First.. Joaquín has done a good job in the Reddit posts. In particular maintaining a productive and useful conversation in Reddit, which is rather difficult. So I definitely approve of him extending this to the X posts. Second.. X and Reddit are not the only popular social networks to interact with these days. And I think it's important to bring back some life to Boost to find our audience where we haven't before. Hence I would like to see posts in as many networks as seems useful. To that effect I've created some unofficial Boost accounts in a few networks: LinkedIn, mastodon.social, hachyderm.io, bsky.app, and cohost.org. I can give Joaquín access to those if so desired by the community. -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supone Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net