C++ Standards Committee "reflector" mailing lists
I just discovered the following four Google Groups, opened a few days ago:
- https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/lang-discussion/about
- https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/lang-proposals/about
- https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/lib-discussion/about
- https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/lib-proposals/about
It's not immediately clear whether these are official, though the owner's email is "[email protected]", so they may well be.
UPDATE: It appears they are official. From boost-dev:
It's an initiative led by Herb Sutter.
He proposes that the committee moves to publically readable (but not writable) discussion groups for the reflector and also that we replace comp.std.c++ by new public read/write groups (which are the ones you linked).
I think that is great news!
UPDATE: The 'lang' and 'lib' groups have been merged into one. The new groups can be found here:
- https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/groups/dir
There are a number of mailing lists referred to as the "reflector", indeed: broken down by topics for the core language, the library, extensions, and announcements (I'm not sure if there are others). However, the committee's mailing lists are for members of the committee only. I think that the standards organizations mandate that these lists can only be entered by committee members. It is reasonably simple to become a member, though: become a member of a national body (ANSI, DIN, BSI, etc.) and you are in. Depending on which of the national bodies you go to, they may mandate that you pay, show up at meetings, or both. It is fun to go to the meetings as well: the upcoming one is just next week in Kona, Hawaii. Meeting details of the ANSI and ISO meetings (held jointly) are available from the committee's Web site.
That said, whether the mailing lists are that useful is a different matter. Some issues get beaten to death over there while others don't really show up on the mailing list at all but are only discussed at the meetings. Realistically, this is where the decisions are made anyway. I think it is more useful to read the proposals (also available from the site above) and/or go to the meetings to understand the rationale. At the first meeting I went to I just showed up because I wanted to meet people in person who I met only online before (I new that several of the other moderators of comp.lang.c++.moderated went to this meeting). I found it rather enlightening and went to many meetings since (some paid by my employer, some paid on my own, sometimes officially on a delegation, sometimes not).
The public mailing lists are here now: https://lists.isocpp.org