Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] Some statistics about the C++ 11/14 mandatory Boost libraries
From: Stephen Kelly (hello_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-14 19:26:23

Niall Douglas wrote:

> 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.
>> 
>> Haha!
>> 
>> 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

I can't imagine the solution from this description, but I look forward to 
seeing it!

>> 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
>> maintained?
> 
> Marshall have several lists. The strictest lists about 60
> undermaintained libraries.

Great, looking forward to seeing the list!

Thanks,

Steve.