I haven't read the entire chain of emails, so i might be wayy off here. I apologize if that's the case. But think about it. Why do people write/maintain them? Usually because it's something they believe in. If you convince them that the proposed changes will increase adoption/usage I think that would be a sufficient enough motivation. Threatening just seems like a bad idea and maybe, a sign of insufficient communication. Jigish Sent from my iPhone On Aug 3, 2007, at 3:04 PM, "Peter Dimov" <pdimov@pdimov.com> wrote:
Thomas Witt wrote:
We have zero leverage over library developers.
Let me repeat this:
We have ZERO LEVERAGE over library developers.
Any approach that relies on people doing things when asked is doomed.
So what do you recommend? There are two options, addressing the zero leverage problem by using the threat of not including a library in a release, or somehow doing a release without depending on the library developers. Which one would you pick?
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost