To those interested, // sorrt
Oops... accidental pasting.
I have more to say on the topic, but I will split it into a second email since this is pretty long.
Since my SoC package constitutes a significant addition to the Boost.Graph library, Jeremy and I felt that it would benefit from the formal review process - especially the newer code that is concerned with the library interface. However, we're unsure if the review needs the same formality as a completely new library since this is, as mentioned, a (albeit rather large) change to an existing library. An alternate idea might be to take these changes and any new Boost.Graph algorithms in the vault as a single introduction. This could include: - the planar graph suite - cycle ratio code - floyd-warshall (new params) A third option - and actually not a terrible idea - would be to branch the Boost.Graph trunk, perform the integration and then do some serious housekeeping like cleaning up tests, examples, documentations, making sure the interface is clean and consistent, and - god forbid - putting Boost.Graph into boost::graph. The more I think about it, the more I'm becoming a fan of the third option. Unfortunately, it's also a fairly large chunk of work and would take a serious commitment from the developer(s) working on it. Any thoughts? Andrew Sutton asutton@cs.kent.edu