Paul A. Bristow wrote:
... elision by patrick... We need to have a way of saying that this is "Hoping to be proposed for review for Boost".
An important part of the review process, IMO, is getting a user base - this is where the bugs get flushed out, and the unpopular design decisions flagged up. To leave it all to a final review is far too late. (It often leads to rejection, sometimes improvement and re-submission, but all too often, loss of promising code).
This is why I long argued for a formal "Not accepted, Under development and worth giving a try but don't count on it too much yet" status.
A different logo (Developing for Boost? Candidate for Boost? Development for Boost? Prototype for Boost? RFC for Boost? ) would provide this. Perhaps we still haven't got the right words yet?
I really like Candidate for Boost or maybe Submission Candidate for Boost Patrick