Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-18 15:20:30
On 6/18/17 7:30 AM, P F via Boost wrote:
>> Hmmm - Now I don't know what the proposal is. I thought it was to replace bjam. I don't know what else it needs to do. I see CMake as an alternative way of building and testing libraries. I don't see this impacting users in any way. I thought I knew what is being proposed but now I don't think I do. Perhaps this proposal should be something more specific than "Moving Boost to CMakeâ.
> I believe the proposal was to move to cmake using cmakeâs best practices for building, testing, and supporting `find_package`.
LOL - so it seems that neither one of knows what the proposal actually
is. I think it's time for the promoters of this proposal to step back
and agree on some more specific/concrete proposal that can be discussed
in a productive way - probably on a new thread. Probably with a titile
like one of the following:
a) proposal - Add support for CMake for building boosts and running tests
b) proposal - Add support for CMake to make Boost more user friendly by ...
c) proposal - add your own here ...
And this proposal should start with a succinct goal or motivation
Then describe the actions proposed to support the above. It's helpful
it describes who would undertake which actions - library maintainers,
some Developer, Some other player like the developers of CMake itself, etc.
Some sort of plan/description of how this would would proceed - All at
once - some proposals might not make sense unless applied to all
libraries as a requirement. Others might work as an option for each
Sorry I can't be more specific - but of course I'm not the one making
such a proposal.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk