Subject: Re: [boost] Recent changes in Boost policies
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-05-30 10:43:07
On 30 May 2015 at 17:05, Peter Dimov wrote:
> > We were definitely fully aware of your work, in fact your work was
> > repeatedly brought up in detail at the meeting itself and there was some
> > discussion about how complete it was if I remember, and how much it would
> > take to finish the job, or whether instead just to draw a line between
> > those libraries it works for and those it does not and make two Boost
> > distros out of that.
> There is no such line; it works the same way for all libraries. And it's
> basically finished. What remains to be done is not any work on bpm itself
> (to a first approximation) but tackling the remaining vestiges of
> centralization in the Boost release process.
Sorry, I meant by discussion of completeness whether you could
arbitrarily fetch any individual Boost library with ideal
dependencies fetched, and that the result compiled and worked
perfectly. Some Boost libraries work perfectly with bpm and others do
not, or at least someone at the meeting said so.
Your personal investment in disentangling Boost libraries was
mentioned, and was recognised and appreciated by all in the room. As
a personal statement, whilst I disagree with the whole effort as a
misallocation of resources given the in my opinion better
alternatives, I absolutely take off my hat and bow to you for the
investiture of effort in an area underappreciated by the community,
and with likely little future recognition once it is complete. Just
because I disagree with some here doesn't mean I don't totally
respect them and their service.
-- 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