Subject: Re: [boost] New name of bjam.exe
From: Matthew Chambers (matt.chambers42_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-22 11:01:22
On 7/22/2010 9:22 AM, Roland Bock wrote:
> Reading the contributions to this thread makes me wonder:
> How is this ever going to be decided? Is there a policy for changing
> names within boost?
There have been a lot of names proposed and quite a bit of dissension about the name changing at all due to build script breakage. However, I'm pretty sure the
names not derived from "Boost.Build" are disqualified because they would either defeat the purpose of the renaming or they would require rebranding of
Boost.Build in its entirety. And the concerns about build script breakage are nullified if my suggestion of leaving a (deprecated) bjam wrapper executable to
call the new executable is used. So that still leaves a pretty long list, but at least they're all quite similar:
Apologies if I missed a few.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk