Boost logo

Boost :

From: Timothy M. Shead (tshead_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-21 14:27:12

I've been using a subset of boost (most of the "headers-only" stuff,
plus the regex library) under GNU/Linux for some time now, using
auto-tools scripts that took about an hour to create. If the
maintainers are willing, I would like to contribute my existing work and
expand it to cover the entire library. This would consist of a
"" file in each subdirectory, plus top-level "bootstrap" and
"" files. Since this doesn't really fall under the
"submissions" guidelines on the website, what is the preferred
method to submit these files?

Regarding the earlier recommendation that makes Jam related files a
requirement for library submission:

> THE PROPOSED RULES: No contribution to Boost would be accepted
> without properly-working jamfiles which meet the expectations of the
> Boost community. No contribution to Boost would be accepted if only
> make, automake, and autoconf were provided. No contribution to Boost
> would be *required* to have the necessary files to support make,
> automake, and autoconf. Any contribution to Boost (which itself is a
> kind gift) may optionally elect to contribute an extra gift of files
> to support make, automake, and autoconf, but by explicit policy, there
> would be no pressure nor brow-beating for the official-Jam-only
> developer-contributor to also provide files to support make, automake,
> and autoconf. When a contribution is made to Boost which is Jam-only,
> the community of make/automake/autoconf volunteers would simply kindly
> note that they have some maintenance to do to their
> make/automake/autoconf deliverable which they themselves alone are
> advocating.

I will make a counter-proposal: instead of forcing contributors to
shoulder the burden of build system requirements, let the Jam and
auto-tools volunteers *both* make a commitment to fill in the gaps
(wherever they may be) as libraries are submitted. I see it as a
good-natured race, and I'm willing to make such a commitment because I
know how trivial it is to put together an auto-tools build. Are the Jam
folks willing to do the same? If not, it would seem to speak volumes
about the usability of Jam.

Timothy M. Shead

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at