Re: Revitalization

From: Proton (matt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-12-06 02:36:14

> On Dec 5, 2022, at 4:21 PM, Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 3:41 PM Sam Darwin via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Here's a chart of Boost library Github activity from 2013 through 2022
>> (created by querying api.github.com). Number of pull requests. Number of
>> issues. Development activity has been mostly constant.
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ds-juqrToQR6fl5Ld7TkUYYOt7MO0hQwtaWpDorb8vs/edit#gid=0
>
> Thank you Sam. I believe this confirms the theory that user support
> and design discussions have branched away from the mailing list and
> into GitHub issues and discussions. And the public activity on the
> Cpplang Slack (https://cpplang.slack.com/) sponsored by the C++
> Alliance has been robust in terms of day to day technical discussion
> regarding Boost, networking, and the C++ standard.
>
> My "revitalization" theory of Boost is as follows:
>
> * User support has been migrating from the mailing list to GitHub issues
> * Technical discussion has been migrating to Slack and to some extent
> Discord; it is more lively and interactive.
> * Boost is not as popular now because the perception of "monolithism"
> and duplication of std features (i.e. a victim of our own success)
>
> There was a survey three years ago with excellent feedback which
> provides many answers to "why not Boost?"
>
> <https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/gfowpq/why_you_dont_use_boost/>
>
>
> 2. A streamlining of Boost. We need ideas on how to address the issues
> raised by users. Just thinking out loud this could include breaking
> Boost up into several smaller libraries, e.g. "core" boost, "math"
> boost, "network" boost, "C++03 boost". Work on documentation that most
> people agree is poor or is a pain point for users. There has been a
> lot of discussion about this so I won't repeat it here.
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

I concur with the streamlining of Boost to avoid the monolith. ~18 months ago Math offered its first standalone release which was made possible by jumping to C++11. Since we began offering this as an option MSVC has incorporated standalone Math into their implementation of the STL. We are also currently working with SciPy to use the standalone module. We can offer bug fix releases on our Github page outside of the standard Boost release cadence which assists their development cycle. Multiprecision also has a more recent standalone module that I know people are using because it was by request, and we get standalone specific bug reports. I am willing to assist other maintainers in offering a standalone module of their libraries.

Matt