Hi Phil, On 2015-05-31 15:08, Phil Endecott wrote:
Niall Douglas wrote:
My personal recommendation is that you withdraw this library from review immediately, and go turn it first into an actual standalone Boost library complying with Boost naming guidelines in Boost git modular format.
Personally, I'd prefer boost submissions to *not* use the boost:: namespace etc. until they're actually accepted, with the rationale that "Boost should mean accepted by Boost". A mechanical search-and- replace of foo:: by boost:: would then happen before merging. I know this isn't what has typically happened in the past, but I don't agree with your recommendation that it should be withdrawn because of it. That is what is happening here.
Of more concern is that the unfamiliar directory structure made it difficult for you to review it. Submissions should be either familiar enough or sufficiently documented that reviewers can find the important stuff that needs reviewing quickly. Hopefully the author of this library will reply to your email with pointers that will help other reviewers. My intention was to create a directory structure that is familiar for most people, which is the old directory structure of Boost. It should have been pointed out.
Regards, Ábel