Subject: Re: [boost] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-20 08:23:26
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga via Boost
> Sent: 19 July 2017 16:21
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Ion Gaztañaga
> Subject: Re: [boost] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
> On 19/07/2017 16:33, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> > Organizationally speaking, what needed to be done? First, we choose
> > which scenario we prefer. Second, the SC appoints a person in charge of
> > realizing the plan. If gradual, he sets off to work with the results
> > immediately appearing in Boost as libraries are picked up by the CMake
> > test/build infrastructure one by one. If sudden, he sets off to work on
> > his branch. When ready, the SC votes on the switch.
> > So far I have left unspoken something that everyone should have picked
> > up - the role of Rene in all this. It's patently obvious that a gradual
> > transition would be much (much!) harder without him around, so we've
> > pretty much ruled that possibility out now. This was, in my opinion,
> > completely unnecessary.
> > Or was it?
> >> The CMake issue has been around for years and hasn't been able to
> >> progress primarily because "obviously biased" vocal minorities were
> >> holding it back with threats.
> > To put it bluntly, did the glorious CMake transition HAVE to start with
> > killing the workhorse and driving away the rider who got us where we are?
> Thanks Peter. I think you've expressed very precisely what I (and maybe
> others) think.
> We want both Rene and Jon in Boost.
And we need lots of new blood capable of implementing Boost using CMake with lots of time and energy, enthusiasm and stamina.
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830