Re: [boost] [Asset Stewardship] About the Beman Project

Zach Laine wrote:

Right. All those responses are valid. My point was not that the review outcome was problematic. My point was that the Boost review process and the WG21 review process have fundamentally different aims. Boost wants the best C++ libraries that appeal to its reviewers. WG21 wants to make sure something is appropriate for the standard. Those are similar, and even overlapping, but fundamentally different goals.

It doesn't really matter. For a library to get into the standard it needs to undergo design review by LEWG and be accepted by LEWG. Adding a Boost review on top of that can never be a "win" for the author, because it can only increase the probability of rejection.