At 01:50 PM 12/24/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
Robert Ramey wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
I don't know if this is what you're suggesting, but I can't overemphasize how odious I find the idea of capitalizing on Boost's ready-made community, knowledge, and mailing lists, only to take the successful project away later and run it under "a separate umbrella."
Hmm - maybe this concern is a little premature. Perhaps it might be best left until such a library is actually built in accordance with some boost consensus and passes boost review.
That would certainly be much too late, especially if the intention is to do the major work of development here and then take it away before even submitting it for review.
My concern may be the result of misinterpretation, but if not, we ought to deal with it now.
Yes. We do have successful models from Spirit, Python, and several other libraries of projects that run their own mailing lists and some other resources while continuing to work under the Boost umbrella and continuing to contribute to Boost releases. That's fine, and hopefully what the OP was talking about. But to hijack Boost resources during early development with no plan to actually summit a library for formal review would be totally unacceptable and lead to a lot of ill-will and hard feelings. --Beman