8 Apr 00:26
Re: [Proto] Review result
From: Eric Niebler <eric <at> boost-consulting.com>
Subject: Re: [Proto] Review result
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Date: 2008-04-07 22:26:25 GMT
Subject: Re: [Proto] Review result
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Date: 2008-04-07 22:26:25 GMT
Hartmut Kaiser wrote: > Hi all, > > initially I was hoping to find some time over the last weekend to go through > the reviews in great detail to put together a proper review report. Well, as > things happen, I was not able to find the time> > To avoid further delays, here is the short version of the review result: > Proto got 16 reviews (That's well above average! Thanks to all for > participating), out of which 15 have been positive. The one 'No' essentially > stated that the library, even if doubtless very useful, shouldn't be > accepted yet, mainly because there has to be done more work in the area of > formalizing the problem domain. > > In my opinion this is an overwhelming result and I'm whole heartily agreeing > with the majority of the voters. > > Proto is accepted as a Boost library. > > The discussions have been very detailed and there have been raised a lot of > (mostly minor) issues, but Eric is aware of the problems and is working on > solving them. I'll try to put together a summary as soon as possible. Thanks to everybody who participated in the review, esp. Hartmut for being review manager. For anybody interested in following along, branches/proto/v4 is where I'm incorporating the review feedback. It already has all of the interface breaking changes I plan to make, modulo any necessary changes that come out of the "boost::result_of and C++03" thread. I'll be trying very hard to get proto into trunk in time for 1.36. Thanks again, -- -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
> To avoid further delays, here is the short version of the review result:
> Proto got 16 reviews (That's well above average! Thanks to all for
> participating), out of which 15 have been positive. The one 'No' essentially
> stated that the library, even if doubtless very useful, shouldn't be
> accepted yet, mainly because there has to be done more work in the area of
> formalizing the problem domain.
>
> In my opinion this is an overwhelming result and I'm whole heartily agreeing
> with the majority of the voters.
>
> Proto is accepted as a Boost library.
>
> The discussions have been very detailed and there have been raised a lot of
> (mostly minor) issues, but Eric is aware of the problems and is working on
> solving them. I'll try to put together a summary as soon as possible.
Thanks to everybody who participated in the review, esp. Hartmut for
being review manager. For anybody interested in following along,
branches/proto/v4 is where I'm incorporating the review feedback. It
already has all of the interface breaking changes I plan to make, modulo
any necessary changes that come out of the "boost::result_of and C++03"
thread. I'll be trying very hard to get proto into trunk in time for 1.36.
Thanks again,
RSS Feed