On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 11:18 AM Christian Mazakas via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'd be curious if it gains any real users by being included in Boost and who knows, maybe people will actually like it..
I have mixed feelings about this. One the one hand Boost is supposed to be slightly more relaxed than LEWG with respect to new additions to the collection. But in my opinion, the acceptance of this library is effectively saying to the public that the Boost community of reviewers believes the public interface and intended use-case of the library follows what we believe to be best practices and state of the art for C++ coroutines. Is it, however? I don't know, as I am not a subject matter expert, but I don't think that accepting to answer that question just by "shoving it into Boost" is healthy. Boost.Beast, Boost.JSON, Boost.URL all had users outside the Boost community well before any reviews took place. I would argue that Boost.JSON was so similar to previous popular works that it wasn't that meaningful but Beast and URL are sufficiently novel in their public interfaces that it could not and should not have been taken for granted that they should be accepted without some users. Not all Boost libraries need this, only some. For example Boost.Charconv is essentially already vetted since it is based on an established API. I don't speak for Boost and I am relatively new compared to some folks that have been around from the beginning, so I am unsure whether my criteria about seeing some field experience for this particular library is important. Perhaps someone who has been involved in Boost longer than me and is more familiar with the unwritten rules of the review process can offer clarity on this point.
It's not too late for a review from you or Richard if you have strong feelings that the library ought to be rejected?
I do not believe I have sufficient emotional, mental, and technical resources to write a review for this library at a level of quality that represents Boost's reputation and the interests of the invested parties fairly. All I have are these thoughts, which are not sufficient to arrive at a simple accept or reject conclusion. Other people will need to decide if and what importance to place on it. I'm okay with any outcome. Thanks