Re: [boost] boost modularisation status?

Subject: Re: [boost] boost modularisation status?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-02 10:32:54

on Sun Jan 01 2012, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet-AT-wanadoo.fr> wrote:

>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>> I understand, but I disagree.  There's no reason to make the (already
>> high) hurdles to such a transition stratospherically high.  If the
>> Boost community decides to use any given new piece of infrastructure,
>> there's no reason it has to be a protracted process; it can just
>> happen.
> 
> Does this means that the library authors will need to maintain two
> build systems?

No, that would be bad, IMO.  My point was that we should not let
ourselves get into such an intermediate state.

>>> Resuming, I think that we need a formal review for CMake build once it
>>> is able to build the whole Boost libraries.
>>
>> Again I disagree.  The review process is for libraries, and Boost has
>> never formally reviewed tools like this.  I am more than happy to have a
>> discussion about it, and I believe that discussion should inform our
>> decision, but I believe it is possible for the steering committee to
>> make a decision as a matter of policy.
>> 
> Oh, as lastly we have started to review also the tools 

Oh, we have?  Maybe I'm not paying enough attention.  Could you clarify?

> I thought it works like that also for a new build system, but you know
> better how Boost works. I think it is time to start this
> discussion. Please could the interested parties start a thread that
> results once for all in a decision on whether CMake based build is
> adopted or not?

It's not time to make such a decision, unless we're going to decide
"no."  The system isn't complete yet.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com