Subject: Re: [boost] Is Boost dead? [Re: Anyone is interested in being review manager of 'Application'?]
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-09 04:02:38
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Sohail Somani
> Sent: 08 May 2014 19:00
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Is Boost dead? [Re: Anyone is interested in being review
> On 08/05/2014 11:56 AM, Niall Douglas 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
> a long time and from my perspective, they did a good job given what they were
> aiming for. I disagree with the whole modular Boost thing, but it will
probably take a
> couple of years and some releases before we can say that it was worth it. Has
> even been a git-only release yet? I don't think so.
The move to modular Boost was a *massive* one, and it is clear that many people
got to grips with it yet. As an old git, I've struggled with what Linus himself
"The Information Manager from Hell" and I think I am not alone.
I don't think we have the systems and documentation anywhere near good enough,
especially for those who are not regular GIT users.
The move to more local control of edit permission is also causing delays. I'd
like to go back to the previous 'honor' system.
Digesting C++14 and C++17? are also taking a lot of effort.
But maintenance *is* taking place, so Boost isn't dying, just maturing.
Including the Boost libraries is become 'Standard'.
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 01539 561830
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk