Re: [boost] Informal CMake meeting at CPPCon

Subject: Re: [boost] Informal CMake meeting at CPPCon
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-02 17:22:51

On 02.10.2017 13:06, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 10/2/17 9:16 AM, Stefan Seefeld via Boost wrote:
>
>> 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
>> (eventually) migrate.
>
> That happens to be my position as well - see my presentation boost 2.0
> from a couple of years ago.  But it's pretty clear that that's a
> minority opinion.  It's also clear that there is no point in doing
> much of anything until we have  clear idea how CMake is to be used in
> the context of boost.
>
> I'm looking for something that we can agree on so some progress can be
> made.  I'm please that reached a concensus that proposed tools should
> go through a review process similar to that of libraries.  I think
> this will be a positive step in helping boost move forward.

It is indeed. Thanks to you all to try to resolve this problem.

        Stefan

-- 
      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...