Subject: Re: [boost] Informal CMake meeting at CPPCon
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-02 18:20:40
> 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
There is good reason why tooling doesn't go through a formal review
process, it could never pass a formal review.
I think requiring a cmake conversion to pass a formal review is an
impossible ask. The cmake conversion will never reach the quality of the
Boost.Build one in any reasonable time period, and moreover, everything
keeps shifting with time.
I'd support a simple majority, yay or nay vote for the proposed cmake
design. Without commentary or review. Makes things feasible. And a
second simple majority yay or nay for when Boost.Build is to be turned
off (if ever).
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk