Subject: [boost] Further modularization (was: [release] many release notes pending)
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-11-09 16:56:04
On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 17:47, stefan via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 2018-11-09 11:41 a.m., Mateusz Loskot via Boost wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 17:06, James E. King III via Boost<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 10:52 AM Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 2:43 AM Joaquin M LÃ³pez MuÃ±oz via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >>>> Maybe some other protocol is needed for handling release notes.
> >>> You mean, like, merging them?
> >> I think a better strategy would be to define release notes in yaml (...)
> > You mean, reno?
> Let's not get side-tracked into another tools & languages discussion.
> I think the high-order bit of the proposal is to further modularize the
> process by letting individual projects manage *their* release notes,
> then somehow syndicate them.
Despite I support your views on pushing the modularisation further,
I am as optimistic about pushing it wild
- even American Wrestling has rules :)
Eventually, things will have to integrate somehow, there will have to
be common conventions, formats, tools to make all the wild libs
running free behave at common table.
Someone will have to write those, or shop for them to avoid reinventing.
> If we could already agree on that as a (mid-term) goal, that would be
> great. The rest (languages, schemas, tools) can be discussed separately.
Such separation not practical I see.
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk