Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 03:54:19PM -0500, Nat Goodspeed wrote:

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé < kaballo86@hotmail.com> wrote:

On 23/01/2014 04:23 p.m., Nat Goodspeed wrote:

...

...

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Lars Viklund wrote:

Please consider making a post starting a new thread with a distinct

...

subject so that it'll be easier to find this report.

So noted. Are you asking me to repost the same content on the three mailing lists? It might be a long enough mail to produce a bit of eye-rolling if I do.

I expect that from this point on, an interested party would find it with a search engine.

While you repost it to the three mailing lists please use a subject like "Boost.Fiber review results" or similar as customary, so that it can be easily found with a search engine.

That sounds like a second request for me to repost, and as yet no one has asked me not to.

Would it be reasonable to post a new message with the requested subject line, whose body is a link such as this? https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/boostusers/oOYfJ1yf_Sg/DwljFDR6gWoJ

If you're going to link externally, it would probably be a better choice to use one of the gateways (gmane or mailman) listed on the Boost Lists page instead of the comparitively emphereal and for some, inaccessible Google Groups. As for reposting over and over again, the existing top-level post is probably reasonably fine for most people. My strong objection was against the invisibility of a post to a deep nesting level in a wide thread. Judging by the links to previous results on the Boost Review Status page http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html there seems to be a mixture of top-level posts and more hidden posts to review threads, but none as deep as this one as far as I can see in my sampling of the reports. It'd be nice if whoever does the review of the next Boost library ends up doing it "right" from the beginning :) -- Lars Viklund | zao@acc.umu.se