Re: [boost] [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10

Subject: Re: [boost] [review][beast] Review of Beast starts today : July 1 - July 10
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-05 17:12:09

On 7/5/17 9:32 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Robert Ramey via Boost
> So the problem you
> allude to might be easily fixed by just having a better "best
> practices" document. Maybe there could be a "blank" repository under
> boostorg/ that implements a "Hello world!" function in a header file
> and is organized exactly like a boost library with tests, b2/cmake,
> Travis, Appveyor, CircleCI integration, documentation, and works in or
> out of tree.
> 
> Someone could just clone this blank project and then they are good to go.

Actually it has been my intention to do this for Boost Library 
Incubator.  In fact, I crated Safe Numerics for this express purpose. 
But now I've got a few problems.

a) The safe numerics library received a few comments which I felt I had 
to respond to.  I mentioned that my main purpose was to use it as a 
vehicle to demonstrate how to make a boost library.  Then the respondent 
got a little testy that he might have wasted his time looking at it.  So 
I spent a little time enhancing it and addressing issues.  This sort of 
escalated, safe numerics wrapped it's fingers around my throat and 
wouldn't let go.  Years later - here I am.  Now I've "boostified" it so 
I need a new example....

b) Things have evolved since I made my advice section and it needs to be 
enhanced and updated.  We've got CI tools we didn't have then, Our CMake 
initiatives may have born some fruit so things need some work.

c) Finally, we need to make some progress on the ability to use/test one 
library.  This is mostly an issue of crafting "best practices" 
information.  But still it's a fair amount of work.

Robert Ramey