Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Just another GSoC project idea: Create a Bjam clone based on the Boost libraries
From: Lars Viklund (zao_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-16 07:45:47

On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 01:03:50PM +0100, Boris Schäling wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 09:50:56 +0100, Stephen Kelly <hello_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> >[...]The blocker to moving to CMake is acceptance of it as a goal by the
> >boost
> >community. That's not something for a GSoC to resolve.
> Steve,
> do you know whether this is blocking the next release of the Boost libraries
> (1.56.0)? Or does this have more to do with the move from Subversion to Git
> and is not related to CMake?

I'm not Steve, but I'd like to offer my input on this.

As I gather from lists and IRC it seems that the delay of 1.56.0 is
largely from the major upheaval in the release process that the VCS
migration and modularisation has caused.

In particular, it seems rather hard to develop and make releases when you:
* don't know what branches to work in;
* don't have the regression test suite working;
* have your work disturbed by accidents in other libraries;
* get tripped up by changes in build (b2 headers).

Many of those teething problems have been resolved in the time since the
move, but some of it still seems in flux.

Migrating the build system to CMake and/or the introduction of the
mysterious Ryppl would be something disjoint from the current changes in
process and preferably something embarked on when the releases start
rolling again.

As for the grand plan of things, I guess that's something that the
Steering Committee could clear up, as I can't find any roadmap
documented anywhere in public.

Lars Viklund | zao_at_[hidden]

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at