Subject: Re: [boost] Is Boost dead? [Re: Anyone is interested in being review manager of Application?]
From: Sohail Somani (sohail_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-08 14:54:15
On 08/05/2014 2:32 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 8 May 2014 at 13:59, Sohail Somani wrote:
>>> For sure, Boost has been slowly dying since 2011 now. I'll be
>>> talking on that exact subject at C++ Now on Saturday week, which I
>>> assume will be as popular as a funeral.
>> Can you say that? I think that the main Boosters were busy moving to
>> Git. That took a long time and from my perspective, they did a good job
>> given what they were aiming for.
> There are also wider trends at work. For example, all open source has
> seen a drop of about 25% in terms of regular contributors or projects
> regularly active during this past year 2013-2014. I would assume that
> is macroeconomic in nature.
> It could be that Boost saw a dip 2011-2013 during post-C++11 blues
> and the git migration, then the normal upturn got slammed by the
> macroeconomic downturn for all open source. I do, in my talk, explain
> that I don't know for sure, but I don't think I'm alone in sensing a
> general feeling of disconnection from purpose here compared to a few
> years ago. For example, boost-users has a posting rate nearly a third
> that of before 2011.
My personal feeling is that it is not a general decrease in interest but
possibly a decrease in the ability to invest time which could be
economic. It's hard for me to say that I wouldn't rather be reviewing
Boost libraries and writing cool new code but someone's gotta pay the bills.
If this is the case, then the main change I would suggest is that Boost
needs to be easier to work with. Currently, the modular thing works
kinda OK but it's a giant PITA to fork. I forked it once and I was
successful but eventually gave up and just went off the released zip
file to make the changes I wanted.
>> Too bad I won't be there to attend this funeral! Would have liked to
>> hear your points.
> Some 40 slides and a 20,000 word position white paper should be
> published as part of the conference proceedings.
Sounds like fun....
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk