So after 16 months and 2 releases, what is the plan? So, do you have another logging library to propose to Boost?
That is a joke I am certain. And since better people than me have written and stopped working on a boost logging library due to the simple fact that one has ALREADY BEEN ACCEPTED instead, I can laugh at the joke.
A joke, but the point being, if you aren't putting in the effort yourself, what right do you really have to complain about other volunteers' efforts?
There is nothing stopping someone else from submitting their own
has died. Or even if it hasn't. (Sounds like a lot of people would
No right whatsoever... true enough. But others have put in effort (reviewers, early adapters). I am (just lightly) complaining because at some point (library acceptance?) is there not a duty to carry through (even if it simply means killing it to make way for something else or getting others involved to help)? I suppose the answer to that question is no. library if it really seems this one prefer a more lightweight
solution.)
Agreed. I recall some discussion about the fact that it would be ok if several loggers were in the library if each offered some distinctive value.
I hope that Andrey speaks up and lets us know how his library is coming along.
Me too. Many smart people spent time to review and voted to accept it, and the lib is certainly in use anyway. And logging is a big hole in the core boost functionality, exaggerated somewhat given some of the more recent and esoteric library additions. Andrey, I apologize for complaining but again, as I stated originally, I am simply interested in knowing if there is a plan and perhaps a target boost version.
There isn't any way to make him work on it. And I don't think deadlines make sense in a volunteer organization. So all we can do is enthusiastically plead with him to get it released and then keep it maintained, or to find other volunteers who can help.
Completely agree.