[Root.Ptr] Update (C consultancy -> ISO)
Greetings, I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved. Thank you, -Phil
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Greetings,
I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved.
Why does the repo need to be private while you work on other stuff? -- Olaf
On 08/14/2017 02:48 AM, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Greetings,
I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved.
Why does the repo need to be private while you work on other stuff?
The latest branch includes an entire new C / C++98 parser which I will use for my work. Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down. Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public. I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial. Thank you, -Phil
On 14-08-17 14:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost wrote:
Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public.
From where I'm sitting: on the one hand you seem to regret a lack of community adoption/support, and at the same time appear to manage simple
warning: brief mode engaged Creating a public repo is not costly. Just split it off now. things like repo availability upside-down. This just makes the project (i.e. you) appear untrustworthy, dilettant, intransparent or a combination of those. Just my $0.02 Seth
I am unfamiliar with all the Github features and I will ask support to create a private branch off the public repository. Meanwhile I needed a repository so I just made everything private. I do understand my library needs to be perfect before it is accepted but I need to upgrade the ISO standards before submitting it to Boost (reverse of the usual procedure). I do understand also Root.Ptr is not trivial so I'm better off improving it myself than spend time explaining it. But I will explain it and answer questions after it is well tested. But the benefits are there, hands down. It will also jumpstart C++ when comparing to other languages. What I don't understand is where is the whole memory management crew gone? Years ago there was at least 20 people fascinated about the subject. Now I need to change oil before the engine starts. Regards, -Phil Seth via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 14-08-17 14:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost wrote:
Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public.
warning: brief mode engaged
Creating a public repo is not costly. Just split it off now.
From where I'm sitting: on the one hand you seem to regret a lack of community adoption/support, and at the same time appear to manage simple things like repo availability upside-down. This just makes the project (i.e. you) appear untrustworthy, dilettant, intransparent or a combination of those.
Just my $0.02
Seth
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On 14 August 2017 at 15:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial.
You would like to have (boost-)community input (directly or indirectly) to your commercial product? Anything you propose here needs to (eventually) be BSL <http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt>. degski -- "*Ihre sogenannte Religion wirkt bloß wie ein Opiat reizend, betäubend, Schmerzen aus Schwäche stillend.*" - Novalis 1798
Thanks. Root.Ptr will always be BSL but not the parser. I need to sort this out tonight. degski via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On 14 August 2017 at 15:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial.
You would like to have (boost-)community input (directly or indirectly) to your commercial product? Anything you propose here needs to (eventually) be BSL <http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt>. degski -- "*Ihre sogenannte Religion wirkt bloß wie ein Opiat reizend, betäubend, Schmerzen aus Schwäche stillend.*" - Novalis 1798 _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down.
Have you thought about putting the public branches in a new, public repository? This way the larger C++ community is not deprived of your library for any length of time. Thanks
On 08/14/2017 09:33 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down.
Have you thought about putting the public branches in a new, public repository? This way the larger C++ community is not deprived of your library for any length of time.
I just cloned my private repository into a public one: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr And I've deleted my private branch. So it's all good now. Regards, -Phil
Why you cannot create your own fork and make it private for your stuff? I don't understand. 14.08.2017 15:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost пишет:
On 08/14/2017 02:48 AM, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Greetings,
I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved.
Why does the repo need to be private while you work on other stuff?
The latest branch includes an entire new C / C++98 parser which I will use for my work. Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down.
Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public.
I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial.
Thank you, -Phil
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
It was just a quick way to protect the parser during the weekend but I'll fix this tonight. Alexander Zaitsev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Why you cannot create your own fork and make it private for your stuff? I don't understand.
14.08.2017 15:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost пишет:
On 08/14/2017 02:48 AM, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Greetings,
I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved.
Why does the repo need to be private while you work on other stuff?
The latest branch includes an entire new C / C++98 parser which I will use for my work. Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down.
Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public.
I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial.
Thank you, -Phil
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On 08/14/17 16:46, Phil Bouchard via Boost wrote:
It was just a quick way to protect the parser during the weekend but I'll fix this tonight.
Alexander Zaitsev via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Why you cannot create your own fork and make it private for your stuff? I don't understand.
14.08.2017 15:04, Phil Bouchard via Boost пишет:
On 08/14/2017 02:48 AM, Olaf van der Spek via Boost wrote:
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Phil Bouchard via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Greetings,
I just wanted to update everyone that I just made the Root.Ptr repository private: https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
This is because I am about to work as a consultant to fix memory leaks in C code and possibly C++98 code later on. When I am done testing Root.Ptr then I will submit it to ISO which is already pre-approved.
Why does the repo need to be private while you work on other stuff?
The latest branch includes an entire new C / C++98 parser which I will use for my work. Unfortunately we cannot make a single branch private and we need to take the whole repository down.
Once I am done then I'll make everything public again or if I create a new private repository for the parser then I can make root_ptr public.
I'll let you know but the parser will remain commercial.
Phil, Alexander, please, don't top post. http://www.boost.org/community/policy.html#quoting
participants (7)
-
Alexander Zaitsev -
Andrey Semashev -
degski -
Olaf van der Spek -
Phil Bouchard -
Seth -
Vinnie Falco