Re: [boost] Microsoft vs The Boost License

On 08/06/2017 12:05 AM, degski via Boost wrote:

On 5 August 2017 at 21:21, Phil Bouchard via Boost wrote:

...

On the promotion side to ISO I know the procedures are strict (like a thesis you have to defend in person) and takes some time but it looks like I reached to point of no return ;)

Maybe the Microsoft *vs* root_ptr way of looking at things is wrong. Herb Sutter presented an idea (never stated it was all his) and wrote in his words a "Toy" implementation, with no promiss of going beyond this, to demonstrate that idea. It sounds to me like an invitation for some-one to implement the real deal. That some-one could be you. So why don't you rename root_prtr (again :-) ) to deferred_ptr and incorporate any (other) ideas in HS's, that you might have missed, and I guess you will have an early supporter.

Thanks for the idea but I don't need Microsoft's "intellectual" or marketing help as root_ptr is 99.99% completed and there is nothing else I can possibly need to add to it.