Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 18:47:17
On 14 May 2015 at 23:29, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > Eh? Each git submodule is a direct dependency. Any git submodules
> > inside those is their direct dependencies.
> Enjoy handling cycles :)
> Also enjoy explaining to Robert what 'cycles' and 'dependencies' are :).
> Solve that problem and Boost might not be completely out in the cold as far
> as C++17/Clang modules are concerned.
I believe I have a solution based on pinning branches instead of SHAs
in submodules, and that APIBind based libraries export what API
version they provide.
> Is the boost community self-aware enough to be able to make a list of
> libraries which are maintained and a list of those that are not
Marshall have several lists. The strictest lists about 60
> Do you even want to know? I wonder what would even be done with that
> information? Would you document unmaintained libraries as such, or be
> ashamed of doing so? Would you consider whether to keep releasing the
> unmaintained ones?
I believe a change in how inactive maintainers are removed has been
agreed, plus measures to improve finding new maintainers for
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk