From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-20 12:28:54
Walter Landry <wlandry_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
>> > Anyway, the "Configure" Boost.Build project caught my eye. Which could be
>> > the requirements for such a tool?
>> I also added a few requirements to that one item. I'll expand the other
>> one a bit later.
> Before you start, you should have a look at BuildSystem . It is
> used as the configuration engine for PETSc , which runs on more
> platforms than you can shake a stick at. It is implemented in Python.
> The docs are a bit sketchy, and it still needs work for mere mortals
> to be able to use. In any case, I have implemented it for my
> software, which you can get with subversion at
> There is a configure.py script, but most of the meat is in the python/
I'm always very curious when you make this reference (you've mentioned
this before, right? Sounds familiar) as to what you expect to happen.
As you know, boost has a significant investment and momentum in
designing and developing Boost.Build, we have an extensive test suite,
and we even have fairly complete (if imperfect) documentation. Surely
you recognize that it's unlikely anyone is going to look at a system
whose "docs are a bit sketchy, and it still needs work for mere
mortals to be able to use," determine that it really holds greater
potential than everything we've developed and currently have planned,
convince the other invested parties to change direction, etc?
I am not 100% wedded to Boost.Build; if you've come up with something
better than everything else out there, then we should talk about it,
but you'd have to give us more to go on than a vague reference to some
source code with little additional information other than some caveats.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com