Re: [boost] [EXTERNAL] Request for a "Policy Review" regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'

Subject: Re: [boost] [EXTERNAL] Request for a "Policy Review" regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'
From: Paul Fultz II (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-19 19:43:59

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 6:12:07 PM UTC-5, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
>
> Le 20/05/16 à 00:55, Paul Fultz II a écrit :
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 5:29:14 PM UTC-5, Raffi Enficiaud wrote:
> >>
> >> Le 20/05/16 à 00:09, Paul Fultz II a écrit :
> >>
> >>>
> >>> There is already library's that do this(such as hana and compute),
> >>
> >> This is not an argument.
> >>
> >>> so there
> >>> hasn't been a technical problem with the tooling.
> >>
> >> Nobody said there is one, people rather said there is no technical issue
> >> in having your CMakeLists.txt in ./build or ./cmake or ./anyothersubdir
> >> (something that you seems to omit quite often).
> >>
> >
> > Yes there is a technical as well as a usability issue with hiding the 
> cmake
> > file in some directory. This causes problems with other tools. You will 
> no
> > longer be able to install a boost library with `cget install 
> boostorg/hana`.
> > Instead the user will have to manually download the repo, unpack the
> > archive,
> > and then do `cget install hana/build`. I find that unacceptable.
>
> To be honest, I do not care at all about cget. I would like rather to 
> see cget support another way of working.
>

Why? Why can't a boost library support the standard cmake workflow?
 

> In terms of hiding, whether it is at the top-level directory or any 
> subdirectory does not change much: it is buried deep down in a big tree 
> in both cases.
>

What? If its at the top-level its not buried at all.
 

> If someone wants to distribute his library outside of boost, what about 
> having the same patch system as for eg. Debian packages wrt. upstream?
>

They want to distribute their library through boost, but not through the
monolithic release. For example, I can download Boost.Hana here: 

https://github.com/boostorg/hana/archive/v1.0.0.tar.gz

This is directly from Boost.Hana's page. I don't know exactly what you are
talking about, and I don't think users of hana would know where to go to
download this patched release.

 

> > Library authors who support cmake  do not want their support treated as a
> > second-class citizen.
>
> Yet, the primary focus of a boost library is not its good cmake support.
>

It is for hana.
 

> >>> However, we would like the
> >>> wording in the guidelines to state in a more explicit manner that this
> >> is
> >>> acceptable in order to avoid possible future problems.
> >>
> >> There is an *IF* missing there.
> >>
> >
> > Where?
>
> At the very beginning: *IF* there is some agreement (I am not in a 
> position to say what is an agreement) and the policies are changed 
> according to what you want. 
>

Yes, of course, that is what we are asking for.
 

> Your sentence [1] suggest that having a 
> library top-level CMakeLists.txt is already granted.
>

No it doesn't. 
 

> Raffi
>
> [1] Sentence: "However, we would like the wording in the guidelines to 
> state in a more explicit manner that this is acceptable in order to 
> avoid possible future problems."
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>