Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boostlibraries
From: Stephen Kelly (hello_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 20:10:55
Steven Watanabe wrote:
> On 05/14/2015 05:49 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>
>> It also points to the question 'should Boost move more-consciously toward
>> a community maintenance model?', even if only for some libraries. It
>> appears to be what is happening *anyway* without intervention.
>>
>
> It would be utterly pointless to intentionally
> try to move to such a model, when the CMT is
> understaffed to handle the libraries we already own.
> It's better to have a library owned by the CMT
> than by no-one, but it's definitely not ideal.
I didn't say it's ideal - I said it's happening *anyway* without
intervention.
If you want something 'ideal', then
* awareness of what the current state actually is, and
* awareness of what is happening anyway
can only help.
Your claim that what is happening *anyway* without intervention is 'not
good' is a very important claim. Now that you know that something 'not good'
is happening, do you think it's important to know that fact?
Thanks,
Steve.