Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost Library Incubator] Unable to submit library
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-07-20 10:10:23

On 7/20/2014 2:03 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Edward Diener-3 wrote
>> On 7/19/2014 5:22 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
>>> Coincidentally I was tweaking this area of the web site - should be OK
>>> now.
>>> I also fixed up the links in the form -
>> How did you figure out to setup all those links ? Was all that available
>> to me on GitHub but I did not realize it ?
> yep
>>> For those who prefer instant gratification (as I do), I fixed the
>>> documentation link to point to the master branch html documentation.
>>> Browsable html documentation is a requirement of the web site.
>> Where did that string come from ? It works beautifully but I have no
>> idea from where that gets generated.
> I forgot where I found that. I copied the link from Safe Numerics then
> altered it to point to your documentation.

Actually when someone clones my library, the top-level index.html
redirects to the index.html in the html sub-directory.

> BTW, if you want your docs
> to look like boost ones, all you have to do is add the appropriate *.css
> and image files to the html directory. Again, check safe numerics to
> see how this works.

All those *.css and images become redundant when someone clones my
library from GitHub under their own local modular-boost. That is why I
do not include them in the html sub-directory.

>>> I fixed up the issues to point to the issues page for this library in Git
>>> hub.
>> That I can see on the GitHub sight. Am I supposed to fill that out myself
>> ?
> What I do is invoke the issues from the git hub website and copy the URL.
> Then I paste this URL into the submission form

I see the issues page on GitHub now.

>>> I fixed up the download link to point to the github created *.zip file.
>> How did you generate that zip file on GitHub ?
> same as above

I see that now on my library's GitHub page.

>>> So you should be in business - good luck with this.
>> Thanks very much ! Evidently I have no idea all those facilities were
>> available on GitHub, evidently somewhere.
> The whole idea of the incubator is to provide a uniform facade to all the
> facilities that a boost library needs with the minimal disruption possible.
> So if one already has his own trac equivalent, he can just point to that.
> I started this before we made a big commitment to git. It was a happy
> coincidence that it is a good match.
>>> Though not strictly a requirement, consider implementing the test
>>> dashboard.
>>> Different authors have addressed this in various ways. Look at my advice
>>> how to do it and and look at other authors usage of continuous
>>> integration
>>> websites.

I will look at it.

>> I have tests for the library that run under modular boost in the test
>> subdirectory using bjam/Boost Build. Is the test dashboard connected to
>> those tests somehow ?
> I struggled with this. The website requires tests for a library to be
> included
> but there was no obvious way to get something like the boost test matrix
> without turning this thing into a really big job. Also any system I might
> run wouldn't scale.
> After a lot of time learning to understand CMake, I got it working to my
> taste for safe numerics and wrote the instructions in my Simple Tools
> advice. I prefer this to boost build for a number of reasons - not the
> least
> of which it creates a project in my IDE. It also permits. CMake can
> create a project which posts the results to a test dashboard which they
> run on their own website. I've described how to do it in the documentation.
> I like this because it lets those who use a library to test it in their own
> environment
> and post the results to this common area. It means that the platforms being
> used is the same set as platforms being tested. And it's totally scalable!
> And
> it zero work for me or anyone else.

I think you can appreciate that having to duplicate tests which already
exist through bjam/Boost Build when the user clones the project is not
something I really want to do. I really don't see the big deal of
someone interested in my library cloning it locally under modular-boost
and then having all the documentation and tests locally. I explain very
carefully in my top-level *.txt files how to do all this.

> Other libraries such as AFIO have used some "continuous integration"
> websites
> with what looks like good success. Pretty soon I'll lean on the authors to
> write
> a page with instructions (for dummies) on how to set it up. You can see
> this
> in action by clicking on the test dashboard link for AFIO, DI and others.
> The fact that I was able to put all this together with relatively little
> effort
> suggests to me that we're at the dawn of a new era for boost. One where
> it's much easier to get a library ready for review without sacrificing our
> standards. Lets hope so anyway.

I do appreciate the work you put into it. But I think that anyone
interested in a library in the Boost Library Incubator sight should be
trying it out locally just like everyone does with Git projects.

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