Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Moving beyond arm waving?
From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-04 03:09:01
On 2/4/2011 10:08 AM, Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
>> Oh fun. So, "a few of us", who are not really identified and whose level
>> of participation in Boost development is therefore unknown, are apparently
>> are trying to force various changes are result of off-list discussion?
>> The history of this discussion seem to go like this:
>> - Some folks proposed switch to git, and found some opposition, and no
>> consensus was reached.
>> - Beman suggests to play with git, using one library. That seems OK.
>> - Suddenly, folks are starting to discuss various details as if switch
>> to git is already decided.
>> - Then, folks start to discuss modularization as if it's already planned,
>> despite there been different opinions whether it's needed, and how
>> exactly it's needed.
>> - Then, obviously my favourite, it's proposed to switch to CMake in
>> the same big bang, despite the fact that no discussion about that
>> ever happened.
>> It looks like either:
>> - there's some hidden play going on
>> - somebody is trying to just sneak his changes without discussion, either
>> by just doing them, or by talking about them as if they are certain
>> until everybody starts to believe that.
>> What's going on?
> I second that question.
> Volodya, let me say that I'm deeply troubled about this and that I share
> your concerns.
Totally valid questions and concerns. I think John got a little ahead of
himself with his email. I've been on the off-list exchanges which took
place between some folks at BoostPro and some folks at Kitware. The
reason it took place off-list is because it involves Kitware business. I
would like to dispel all doubt, confusion and conspiracy theories by
posting relevant parts of the discussion here, but obviously I can't do
that without first getting permission from the guys at Kitware, but I
think it's safe to at least sum it up like this:
(a) The modularized, git-ified, cmake-ified boost distribution is being
pursued by Kitware for valid business reasons,
(b) That work will go ahead whether Boost ultimately adopts the result
or not, and
(c) Dave is well aware of the fact that Boost may chose not to adopt the
result. He has reminded Kitware of that fact on several occasions.
Nobody is going to force anything on Boost. The folks doing this work
genuinely believe in the value of it and hope that the Boost community
will agree once it sees the results, but that's up to everybody to decide.
Apologies if anybody's feathers got ruffled.
-- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk