On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Hartmut Kaiser <hartmut.kaiser@gmail.com> wrote:
Personally, if boost local was accepted I would expect to use it for a year or so, until I could assume people I work with all had decent C++11 compilers, and then drop it for lambdas. I'm never going to start using boost::phoenix in code I share with other people.
Great, do that. Boost.Local has not to be in Boost in order for this plan to succeed.
This statement can be interpreted in many ways some of which are not fair at all to a library under review and never mentioned on the Boost review process... for a library not to be accepted so a user's "plan" of using Boost in some "way" will not "succeed". Which admission criteria is this... Can you please clarify your statement? Which "plan" is not to succeed by preventing Boost.Local from being accepted? I'd really appreciate you clarifying this. --Lorenzo