Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] proposal and poll
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-01 08:17:28
Peter Dimov wrote:
> Julian Gonggrijp wrote:
>> The following (evolutionary) global changes to Boost should be planned and given priority over any other proposals [e.g. 5], in the following order:
>> 1. Reduction of dependencies between Boost libraries.
>> 2. Simple but effective automation of dependency handling.
> We all agree on these goals in principle, but what do you actually propose we need to do? We need to start somewhere. Specifics are needed.
By now it is clear to me that more specifics are needed. I'm looking out
for time to work on that.
> What I can contribute at the moment is
> - a suggestion that we publish a Boost dependency report in HTML format somewhere on boost.org that tells us, and anyone interested, what depends on what and why;
> - a program that generates such a report (in plain text) as a starting point (attached).
Thank you for this contribution, Peter! Ideally the HTML report is generated
from the latter plaintext, of course.
In order for your program to provide input for the automated downloader, I
think it would have to provide information at a coarser level of detail, i.e. entire
submodules. This is something we can figure out in due time.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk