Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [cmake] Pull request announcement
From: mike.dev_at_[hidden]
Date: 2018-09-15 11:24:55

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of Stefan Seefeld via Boost
> Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 7:43 PM
> On 2018-09-14 12:14 PM, mike via Boost wrote:
> [...]
> Sorry, that never worked. New tools and processes appear (and disappear
> !) all the time. That's no reason to impose on any project maintainer to
> switch to whatever is en vogue.

Actually, it works quite well outside of boost. As I said, we are not talking
about following the latest hype here but the de-facto standard for
cross-platform C++ projects.

> Again, I'm not arguing for or against a specific set of tools. I'm
> arguing against the very idea to force >150 projects to adopt the same.

Imho, as long as boost tries to provide a joint release and distribution
mechanism and there is such a tight coupling between the libs,
at least the public interface (how do I tell a library, which compiler
and flags to use and how does a library tell me what it's dependencies are)
should be standardized just as it is now.

Also, far more than 150 Projects have adopted cmake (or at least provide
a cmake interface).

> So, to get back to the original announcement: all your effort and good
> intentions notwithstanding, I believe you shouldn't even try to
> contribute such infrastructure, unless of course your are fully
> committing to maintain it all, i.e. allow me to forward each and every
> bug report I'm going to receive on my projects that is related to that
> build logic.

As long as we are talking about genuine bug reports and not
feature request: Sure
> Stefan


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