Subject: Re: [boost] [modularization] Are modular releases a goal or a non-goal?
From: Thijs van den Berg (thijs_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-22 08:24:31
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Stephen Kelly <hello_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Thanks for your response too. I agree what you want would be nice, but what
> you want seems to be non-goals for boost.
> That's why I would like to hear from others why boost migrated to git. What
> goals or purpose did that serve? Did it only serve some goals for the
> developer perspective (ie, not any goals for the users of boost)?
Thanks Steve, I agree that possible future goals is a different discussion
from historical objectives.
I think historically the purpose was purely for modular developers: I
remember that Julian Gonggrijp referred to discussions with you
and suggested :
"In order to use Boost in a truly modular way, a developer would rather
just clone only the libraries she needs
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk