On 5/14/2015 5:29 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
Niall Douglas wrote:
Me personally I'd have a "quality Boost" distro where the libraries supplied are only those with active maintainers
I would love to see and scrutinize the list of Boost libraries whose metadata files are claimed to have correct maintainer information. Follow here for an incomplete list of libraries which have false maintainer information:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/259399/focus=259448
It's incomplete because at least MPL has a metadata file with false information, which was not merged by the person listed as its maintainer, and as we all know very well, MPL does not have a maintainer.
Is the boost community self-aware enough to be able to make a list of libraries which are maintained and a list of those that are not maintained?
Do you even want to know? I wonder what would even be done with that information? Would you document unmaintained libraries as such, or be ashamed of doing so? Would you consider whether to keep releasing the unmaintained ones?
Maybe you need to have the lists before you know the answer to those questions, which is what leads me to ask whether you want to know at all. Maybe not knowing is useful?
Your sarcasm is not appreciated. Instead you could make an intelligent suggestion about what you think Boost should do regarding a library which has no active maintainer. That might start a discussion which would solve that problem.