Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Is Boost dead? [Re: Anyone is interested in being review manager of ‘Application’?]
From: Sohail Somani (sohail_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-16 13:37:19

On 09/05/2014 6:45 AM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> If you want to modularize, then decide that that is a goal for Boost and I
> will help.

My point of view is from a regular user of I don't know how many years
who loves to submit patches when possible and not a developer of Boost
so take this with that in mind. To me, modularization is completely
unimportant. I just manually delete the stuff I don't need whenever I
upgrade Boost.

I'm not sure why the different repos were created although I'm sure
there are very legitimate reasons.

In my version, each maintainer forks the main repo (which has the source
for everything) and issues pull requests for their libraries. I know it
doesn't capture everything or cover every use case but man this would
make it so much easier to create pull requests for itty bitty patches.
As it is now, it is tedious to properly fork boost which is the whole
point of git. Small patches are how you get regular new contributors.

Moving to git was a smart decision but my personal experience has shown
that the current configuration does not encourage forking in a way that
makes it easy to contribute.

Would anyone know what the rate of incoming patches from outside
developers has been since the change? That would be an easy way to tell
if it's just me being lazy (probably is).


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