Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [CMake] Status of cmake support.
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-24 22:41:59

On 24.02.2018 17:25, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 2/23/18 3:53 PM, mike via Boost wrote:
>> Thank you both for the update and explanation. I hope you find a
>> review manager soon. And I hope the lib doesn't get rejected just
>> because some authors want to block transition to cmake altogether.
> It will also ensure that everyone gets a say. Hopefully the employment
> of the review processes will result in general acceptance of the
> result/decision regardless of what it turns out to be.

As one of the more vocal opponents to the announced "move", allow me to

I think there is a real danger that two distinct questions get conflated:

a) a technical review of infrastructure to build Boost libraries with CMake.

b) whether and how individual library developers / maintainers can be
mandated to use any particular tooling (be it to build, to document, to
bug-track, etc., etc.)

It's true, a successful completion of a) makes it more likely for the
code to be accepted by the community. But neither should a positive
review result in a mandatory use by all libraries, nor should a review
be biased based on the perceived danger of having to migrate if the
review is completed successfully.


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

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