El 12/03/2024 a las 2:39, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost escribió:
Is there any reason that the new web site could not be subjected to a process similar to the formal process for new libraries? This would help build a consensus around functionality, design, etc. I just don't see any other way to be sure that all considerations are accounted for.
The main difference IMHO is that the mailing list is full of C++ experts that are probably terrible at design and usability ;-) Just look the aesthetics of our templated or preprocessor metaprogramming code! Now seriously, not a formal review, but I think it's important that main issues (https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2/issues and https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2-docs/issues) could be discussed and monitored periodically (say, every 6 months) in the ML. Would be cpp.al folks fine with this approach? Best, Ion