Subject: Re: [boost] boost modularisation status?
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-01 17:35:21
Le 01/01/12 20:51, Eric Niebler a écrit :
> On 12/31/2011 5:37 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>> on Sat Dec 31 2011, Dave Abrahams<dave-AT-boostpro.com> wrote:
>>> on Sat Dec 31 2011, "Robert Ramey"<ramey-AT-rrsd.com> wrote:
>>>> hasn't been modified in 3 years.
>>>> Also, when I peruse my local copy of the release tree, I don't see what I
>>>> expect to see according to
> This page also needs to be updated or deleted.
>>>> That is, I expect to seem include inside of the libraries at
>>>> boost/libs/tr1/include - I don't see this.
>>>> What is the current status of this?
>>> Glad you asked!
>>> That wiki page is (fortunately) out of date.
>> I've updated the Wiki page now. Please let me know what you think.
> I for one am glad to see this effort is ongoing. I'd like to see this
> project get more visibility as I see it as important for the long-term
> health of Boost. Can we put something on boost.org encouraging people to
> try out the (pre-alpha) modularlized boost distro, where to file bugs
> and how to get involved, etc?
this should be considered as a new tool (and in addition it needs CMAKE
build). While I consider the modularization useful, I find that adding a
new build system to Boost will need some official maintainers of the
CMake files for each one of the Boost libraries until the library
authors have taken the time to be familiar with the new build system. Of
course, this will imply that we need regular testers for both build
systems which will be time consuming
Resuming, I think that we need a formal review for CMake build once it
is able to build the whole Boost libraries.
Is CMake build ready for review? If no, what is missing, not working
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk