Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake

Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal for moving Boost to CMake
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-18 17:06:45

On 6/18/17 9:15 AM, Stefan Seefeld via Boost wrote:
> Hi Robert,

> It's really sad to see how much effort gets wasted on this list over the
> years as ambitious people propose one idea or another, but eventually
> get dragged down by the community's inability to "get their act
> together" and move in almost any direction, leaving us with the status quo.

LOL - I'm really sympathetic.  I often feel the same way.

But if you think about it, it really can't be any other way.  We each 
have our own set of problems which are "caused" by something or someone 
else.  The solution is to have that "other" thing get fixed.  And this 
often ends up with a bunch competing and conflicting ideas which an 
never really be resolved.  (BTW - it's not just boost it's everywhere).

But we are blessed by self awareness and the ability to engage in 
introspection.  So we can step back and reset and ask the question what 
the hell are we trying to do anyway.  This is sometimes helpful.

A different problem is that compromise - which is necessary often takes 
the form of including everything - which often kills the whole idea. We 
have to work harder to address that.  But as the author of two accepted 
boost libraries, I can say taht there is no way I could have completed 
those tasks without collaboration of those on this list, reviewers, 
testers, bug reporters, infrastructure builders etc. Impossible. I don't 
know enough - I don't think anyone does. (though I think a goodly number 
of us think they do - but I doubt they have actually gotten a library 
into boost).  So to keep moving forward we have to find a way to keep 
this working.

I've sort of inherited the role of mailing list nannie from david 
abrahams.  I'm sorry about that - I just can't help it.