Re: [boost] Boost is supposed to serve *the entire C++ community; it isn't Boost's goal to serve Boost's community*

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost is supposed to serve *the entire C++ community; it isn't Boost's goal to serve Boost's community*
From: Joseph Van Riper (fleeb.fantastique_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-21 12:46:02

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 10:52 AM Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 5/20/16 2:32 AM, Joseph Van Riper wrote:
> > I hope this information on how one small team of developers use this tool
> > is useful to you.  I'd be happy to answer any questions, if you'd like,
> on
> > our use of boost if it would help guide your collective efforts.
> >
>
> I liked your post.  It's easy for us to spend too much time arguing
> about what "real users" have to do and what our real constraints are.
>

Heh, I've lurked for a while now, to get a feel for the community.

I know we use boost in ways that are a little different than, say, a games
developer, but I suppose if nobody says anything, you won't know how anyone
uses boost, which leaves you with nothing but theoretical arguments of
imaginary stakeholders.

> Since your company needs to make the effort to keep things up to date
> and certify the latest version for your environment anyway, consider
> becoming a boost tester.  It's a mostly automatic process which does
> most or all of what you're doing and it would be very helpful for the
> rest of us.
>

Hmm... that is not a bad idea, and would at least be one small thing we
could do to help.

Our build of boost is slightly unique, in that we must build on Linux with
-fPIC, static libraries binding to static runtime libraries (I can almost
see some people rolling eyes and shaking heads, but this decision came
after quite a lot of thought and consideration for our peculiar needs), so
if that kind of information is useful, all the better.  I've already
automated boost updates on the Linux machines we support (Debian build
machines dating back to Squeeze, although I probably need to make older
machines).  I don't think anyone would complain if I set up an automated
way to pull down release candidates or the like for automated testing,
provided this didn't get in the way for our own efforts (e.g. constant,
24-hour-a-day endless testing).

I will look into that.

- Trey