Design, documentation, broad domain, code quality - these are all valid criteria for a successful boost submission. But does boost require that a library be extensively used by many
Lubomir Bourdev wrote: people before being accepted? How many of the boost libraries have been extensively used and proven in the long run upon their initial acceptance? Can we please have the same criteria used for other boost submissions be used for GIL. Lubomir Bourdev wrote:
And again, let's compare with the other libraries. Granted, GIL is larger than the average boost library, but we provide 40 pages of design guide, 12 pages of tutorial, an hour of video presentation with 150+ slides and a full Doxigen browsing tree.
I just want to clarify to everyone that by these comments I did not in any way mean to suggest that boost libraries are not well documented or not "proven in the long run". I did not say that but my words could easily be misconstrued in this way. We at Adobe have embraced the boost libraries for many projects precisely because we believe they are solid and reliable. We think boost is an excellent initiative and this is why we would like to support this initiative by contributing GIL, and perhaps other future libraries. I apologize if my comparison may have offended anyone. Lubomir