Re: [boost] New name of bjam.exe

Subject: Re: [boost] New name of bjam.exe
From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-20 14:09:22

On 7/20/2010 1:58 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> On 7/20/2010 1:54 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Eric Niebler wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/20/2010 1:06 PM, John Maddock wrote:
>>>>>> For those reasons, Rene and I have decided that "bjam.exe" should go.
>>>>>> We're thinking
>>>>>> about naming the executable simply "build.exe", since no other build
>>>>>> tool bothered to
>>>>>> take it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The name bjam is no doubt hard-coded in many build scripts and
>>>>> renaming it will create a lot of unnecessary bugs.
>>>>
>>>> Good point.
>>>
>>> +1 for leaving it "bjam". This is silly.
>>
>> There's nothing silly here. We're solving a real problem that confuses
>> real users.

<snip wildly inappropriate comment from yours truly>

Apologies. How about I try to add something constructive? I think you'll
create more confusion than you'll clear at this point by changing names.
Good or bad, folks are used to bjam. And you'll create a lot of churn
for boost, boost's users, boost packagers, and other users of
boost.build who probably have a lot of scripts that depend on the name
being 'bjam'. I don't see the benefits outweighing the costs.

-- 
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com