Eric Niebler wrote:
No releases. No quality assurance. No reviews. Survival of the fittest. Here's a wacky thought: can we turn boost-sandbox into CBAN (the Comprehensive Boost Archive Network), and cherry-pick the best libraries from CBAN for inclusion in boost? If anybody could make something like this fly, it's boost. We'd need to look closely at the CPAN model to find out why it's successful.
I would think that to make the 'survival of the fittest' model work, there would need to be some built in mechanism where (registered?) users could numerically rate the quality of a library, and change that rating if the library changes. Without a basis like this to sort the libraries by, it would be too easy for the best submissions to get buried by the rest of the random code. Applying this sorting mechanism would allow the best and most popular libraries to float to the top. Then perhaps every month or so the top rated library could be scheduled for formal review. Just an idea. -Jason