Subject: Re: [boost] Informal CMake meeting at CPPCon
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-02 16:16:36
thanks for the update !
On 02.10.2017 12:04, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> Thursday 28 Sept 8 AM at CPPCon a small group of us met to talk a
> little regarding the situation regarding support of CMake by Boost.Â I
> promoted this meeting as I've been concerned that the only discernible
> results of the recent Boost Steering Committee announcement on the
> subject was a certain level of antagonism among boost members
> regarding the subject.
> Robert Ramey (me)
> Rene Rivera
> Vinnie Falco
> Louis Dionne
> David Sankel
> Matt Calabrese
> This was a small but I think a representative group. After some
> preliminary back and forth, I think we agreed:
> a) Nothing was going change regarding the current build system until
> there was a real alternative in place.
> b) That we should support serious proposals to implement CMake support
> within boost.
> c) And that any such proposals should go through the Boost formal
> review process.Â Traditionally, the boost formal review process has
> never applied to boost tools so this would be a departure from
> traditional practice.
> d) Questions regarding the scope/implemention of such support for
> CMake can be handled within the formal review process.
> e) Other questions regarding support CMake and Boost, transition to
> new system, related requirements on boost libraries, etc. can be
> better addressed once we have some sort of consensus on the form that
> CMake support will take.
Have you discussed the possibility for the two (Boost.Build and CMake)
to coexist, by modularizing the build infrastructure such that some
libraries might switch to CMake while others might continue using
Boost.Build ? I continue to believe that there is no real alternative to
such an approach, as you can't coerce anyone into migrating to a new
tool, you can only offer a new tool and hope that people will
Â Â Â Â Â Â Stefan
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...