Re: [boost] [test] Looking for co-developer/maintainer

On Mon, 19 May 2014 15:37:33 -0700, Richard wrote:

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Bjørn Roald spake the secret code <52E051FA.8030202@4roald.org> thusly: [snip]

...

As it stands, without some adjustments in the attitudes of the major stakeholders here with regards to each other's work, I see little hope of this happening. That is a sad thing as I think their combined effort and respect could have led to much more than two competing efforts is likely to ever do.

Sorry, I have to laugh at some of the mind-reading that goes on in these threads. How does anyone besides the parties involve have any idea how much "respect" is contained in their minds? To my knowledge, noone involved has made any explicit statements.

I see a problem and I do a crapton of work to fix it, but somehow I get labelled, either implicitly or explicitly, in these threads as a bad actor that has "no respect" for others or that I'm needing an "attitude adjustment".

If all of you had joined in my call for reviewers many, many months ago, you could have expressed whatever concerns you had then and made sure that work proceeded as you thought it should. But no, you did nothing. You did not participate. You come in at the last minute and basically insult my character. What the hell does that say about this community?

Ouch, that's a little harsh. Unfortunately these kind of statements take away from the merits of your argument. You don't want the last impression left on people's mind to be that Richard's a crank and therefore let's ignore him, even though your work maybe quite solid. You've noted that you're not interested in forking the library. Why not just "fork" the documentation. That is permanently host your alternative documentation somewhere else, and every time you post to a ML include a link to it. That, and if your documentation proves popular enough it will show up in the top one or two spots on Google and it will then become the "defacto" documentation.