Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] proposal and poll
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-01 08:28:50
Stephen Kelly wrote:
> HOWEVER: All of this is off-topic for this thread. I'm listing it only
> because people are thinking too far down the line and getting stuck. I
> recommend dropping discussion of tooling and how to record/resolve
> dependencies. Understand that there are solutions for what will come up down
> the line and you don't need to worry about them now.
> I recommend you return to the question of whether Boost wants to modularize
> or not.
I agree with this point. Thank you for this remark, Stephen.
> If you do want that, then consider whether my recommendations linked in the
> start of the thread are specific or concrete. There were suggestions in this
> thread that my recommendations were not concrete or specific or didn't show
> any benefit.
> I don't understand or agree with those conclusions, but I think those are
> the useful and small questions you guys should focus on if you want to make
> any conclusive progress at all on this issue.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk