Subject: Re: [boost] New name of bjam.exe
From: Eugene Wee (crystalrecursion_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-20 14:13:57
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 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.
There is also the risk that the new name may end up with "(formerly
known as bjam)" commonly appended to it, and thus not clear up any
confusion at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk