I worry about the integrity of the Boost review process. The review manager and all the accepting reviewers were/are affiliated with the C++ Alliance. The review manager thanks these reviewers, but not the ones who rejected. The outcome of the review is presented as a foregone conclusion, with no analysis of the actual topics that have been discussed. The review manager does not state how the different reviews and issues have weighed in on his decision. There is at least one accepting review where the reviewer hasn't even built and ran a single example. Meanwhile, the two rejections (and some non-review comments) brought up major design questions which haven't been addressed by either the review manager or the author(s). These facts make the outcome way less clear, in my opinion.