Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-07-27 14:40:31

Since you are making a variety of accusations..

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Gary Furnish via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I've observed from the outside that basically no one was ever
> going to touch because the people who like it (who happen
> to be single points of failure for the entire boost ecosystem)
> basically out-shouted everyone whenever a technical discussion came
> up.

Prove it.

> Its not like there haven't been concerns about for
> years.

All build systems, heck all software, has "concerns".

> Its not like the documentation for wasn't
> basically "ask the mailing list or prey someone else has asked stack
> overflow" for years.

The documentation is bad compared to what other documentation?

> Its not like every time a new version of MSVC
> beta comes out doesn't break and its not a priority
> because the maintainers of don't use MSVC.

Prove that it wasn't a priority. Considering that the last Boost release
was delayed precisely to support MSVC building.

> Its not like
> everyone submitting to boost doesn't complain about having to learn a
> non-standard build system that isn't documented richly enough to write
> scripts from scratch.

Again, prove it.

> These are not new problems. I am *really* glad
> that SC did something because in my mind it means boost won't die a
> slow death to just posting independent libs on github.

Prove that the build system is the reason Boost is "dying a slow death"?
For that matter prove that Boost is dying in the first place.

Note.. Yes I will keep posting in these threads in response to false
accusations to the decades of work some of us have put into Boost.

-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams -
-- rrivera/ (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at