Subject: Re: [boost] proposal - modularize Boost build system
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-19 05:21:56
On 18.06.2017 16:45, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 6/18/17 1:34 PM, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
>> Let's be realistic, this is a real problem which only some sort of
>> Boost individual library versioning system for starters can hope to
> If I may be so bold as to summarize your point:
> In order to distribute boost as individual libraries as opposed to a
> monolithic set, individual library versioning will sooner or later
> have to be adopted.
> I think this is indisputable. But I don't think we have to worry
> about in practice. Whatever we do, it will take sometime to get there
> and, if we ever do get there, I think that adding this feature won't
> be a big problem. Of course if we don't ever get there, we've got
> nothing nothing to worry about.
I watch (somewhat in horror, I have to admit) the follow-up mails as
they predictably derail into un-manageable scenarios. So I'd like to
point out that my proposal in no way implies any particular release
policy, i.e. whether individual libraries are released independently or not.
So when you dive into that discussion, please be aware that it's
entirely orthogonal to the proposal at hand. Whether or not releasing
Boost libraries as independent entities has no bearing on the usefulness
or feasibility of modularising Boost.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk