From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-28 02:13:56
John Maddock wrote:
> Robert Jones wrote:
>> I am unclear of what the vault contains, and of its relation to the
>> sandbox.
>>
>> The sandbox is a versioned repository, whereas the the vault appears
>> not to
>> be.
>>
>> What is the workflow here, if there is one? By what path do libraries
>> arrive
>> at
>> Boost proper (ie. part of some release), and where in the process are
>> the review points?
>
> Both the vault and the sandbox provide alternative means developers can
> use to make code still in development available: the vault provides zip
> file downloads while the sandbox provides full version control when
> that's more applicable. Developers producing code for Boost are free to
> use either, both or neither depending on preference :-)
I honestly do not see the point of having two different locations for
putting nascent implementations for others who are interested to try
out, which may eventually be submitted to Boost. I believe it would be
much cleaner and clearer if there were a single path, which all end
users could peruse, and that path had a regularized way for access both
by the developer and the end user.
Having two different places, and having implementations spread out in
those places where they are hard to find and difficult to try out, does
not help Boost in its incubation of new ideas and libraries based on
those ideas.
As someone who has at least thought of putting code somewhere 'out
there' for other interested Boost end users to try, this shotgun
approach of getting end users interested and uploading implementations
'somewhere' does not suit my approach to such a situation. For me a more
logically rigorous "this is what you need to do" suits me much better.