Subject: Re: [boost] [trac] new versions of boost
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-11 23:39:26
On 11.01.2018 16:53, James E. King, III via Boost wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:38 PM, Edward Diener via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 1/11/2018 8:29 AM, Stefan Seefeld via Boost wrote:
>>> On 11.01.2018 03:07, Raffi Enficiaud via Boost wrote:
>>>> Le 02.01.18 Ã 11:08, Raffi Enficiaud via Boost a Ã©crit :
>>>>> Hi there,
>>>>> Would it be possible to add the next versions of boost to
>>>>> trac/milestones ?
>>>> Kind reminder.
>>> I really do believe we should deprecate trac and encourage everyone to
>>> use github. I understand that to some, having a single place to file
>>> "boost issues" seems desirable, and for that reason they'd prefer to use
>>> trac. But the reality is different: An increasing number of boost
>>> projects migrate to github, and thus won't even listen to trac issues
>>> any longer. So that boat has sailed already. It's time to acknowledge
>>> that, and not make things worse by maintaining multiple trackers.
>> I agree with Stefan. But this needs some proactive actions first and
>> probably some agreement with the Boost Steering Committee:
>> 1) Turn on Issues for every boostorg library in Github
>> 2) Make an announcement on the website that all new bug reports should be
>> either Issues or PRs on Github.
>> 3) Encourage library authors to either clean up what is already on Trac or
>> transfer Trac bug reports to Github issues or PRs for eventual handling.
>> 4) Turn off Trac, if possible, for adding any more bug reports.
>> 5) Announce a cutoff time when Trac will no longer be available for Boost.
>> Having two separate places to deal with bug reports for Boost libraries is
>> not a good situation and having Github Issues and PRs is a much more
>> flexible system for dealing with library changes than Trac.
> This issue was discussed last year. Search the email history for it.
You are referring to
https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2016/12/232002.php, I suppose.
This is a great example of what's wrong with Boost: Boost is living in a
time-loop, and has been for about 10 years. It's about that long since
we migrated to github. However, according to the website
(https://svn.boost.org/trac10/wiki/ModularBoost, referred to by
https://svn.boost.org/trac10/, referred to by
http://www.boost.org/development/bugs.html), this transition is still an
ongoing process. How pathetic is that ?
Proposals how to move forward - even detailed ones such as the above
reply from Edward - are being ignored or shut down, by pointing out that
there is some disagreement. How long are we going to repeat this ? Boost
has the habit of inventing all its own tools. It has even invented its
own version of "Groundhog Day".
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk