Subject: Re: [boost] Request for a "Policy Review" regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-17 17:26:48
Thijs (M.A.) van den Berg wrote:
> Boost is a monolithic release, it might indeed be good to think about how
> the outcome of the CMake discussion interacts with the other profound
> change that has been worked on not so long ago: to model and reduce
> dependencies between libraries and break the monolithic structure.
That is also a bit beside my point. It doesn't matter for this use case
whether Boost is monolithic or not; it could be that only a few of the
libraries have in fact been installed. What matters is that the directory
and that the user wishes to build, test and optionally install one (and then
optionally another) of the libraries.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk