Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-13 13:00:22
On 5/13/2015 12:37 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> On 13/05/15 12:19 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
>> Personally speaking, I think the new library authors are
>> overwhelmingly voting for a complete break with Boost 1.x. It makes
>> no sense to bundle these new libraries into a 1.x monolithic distro
>> when they have no dependencies on Boost.
>> I believe now is the time we start establishing the infrastructure to
>> shape the new Boost 2.0 distro instead of wasting resources on trying
>> to refactor the 1.x distro. APIBind is there for maintainers wanting
>> to be part of both distros. Let's make a clean break.
> Allow me to bring up a point I have been trying to make for quite a
> while: Why does Boost need a single "distro" ?
> Assuming a full breakup of boost libraries with well documented (and
> encoded) dependencies among them, I think a much more viable solution
> for everyone would be to let each boost library become its own project
> with its own release schedule etc.
> So Boost would be merely an umbrella organization, and what you call a
> distro may be the repository of Boost libraries.
> Wouldn't that be something worthwhile to think about and discuss ?
It is definitely worth discussing. The key is "with well documented (and
encoded) dependencies among them".
How do we do this ? '
It is silly to suppose that new "Boost" libraries will be developed that
do not depend on other already existing Boost libraries. If library X
depends on library Y we currently know that library X will work with
library Y for Boost distro N because we have tested them before we
release distro N. If library X goes off with its own release schedule
how do we determine with which versions of Y it will work when it is
being released ?
This is the crux of the matter if we have individual Boost libraries
being released on their own.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk