- Boost - lists.boost.org

Inter pod communication using shared memory
by Murali Bathina 30 Aug '24

30 Aug '24

Hi all, Is Boost supports inter pod communication using shared memory or other ways like boost interprocess communication. Looking inputs on this. Regards, Murali ________________________________ This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information of Mavenir Systems, Inc. or its affiliates and is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any review, use or distribution of this information is absolutely prohibited and we request that you delete all copies in your control and contact us by e-mailing to security(a)mavenir.com. This message contains the views of its author and may not necessarily reflect the views of Mavenir Systems, Inc. or its affiliates, who employ systems to monitor email messages, but make no representation that such messages are authorized, secure, uncompromised, or free from computer viruses, malware, or other defects. Thank You

4 6

glibc version mismatches in CI
by Jeff Trull 28 Aug '24

28 Aug '24

Hi folks, While reviewing the Modular Boost changes for Wave I noticed that our CI is now failing - and we're not alone in this. It looks like the version of glibc in some of the old Ubuntu containers, which are required to compile against old versions of gcc, is incompatible with the Node executable that runs actions/checkout@v2 (and 3 and 4). You might see errors like this: /__e/node20/bin/node: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.28' not found (required by /__e/node20/bin/node) The Github blog discusses the change here <https://github.blog/changelog/2024-03-07-github-actions-all-actions-will-ru…> At least one brave pioneer, Andrey Semashev, has made updates to make CI green again in a handful of libraries, but I haven't seen it discussed on the list. Is there a fix other than "rewrite using manual checkout"? I managed to implement the workaround described in the blog post by adding these lines close to the top of ci.yml: env: ACTIONS_ALLOW_USE_UNSECURE_NODE_VERSION: true Though it seems unwise to rely on in the long run. Best, Jeff

5 5

Governance review
by David Sankel 26 Aug '24

26 Aug '24

The Boost Foundation approved the following motion relating to using the library review process for the governance/fiscal entity decision with 8 in favor and 0 against. MOTION: Support handling the governance question with the following process recommendations: - There should be a period (maybe a month) with a request for proposals. - These proposals should answer questions such as “What problems is this organizational change attempting to solve? How is this in line with Boost’s mission and values? What will the impact be for current volunteers? How does this proposal meet the changing needs of the Boost and wider C++ communities? What risks are there with this approach and how can they be mitigated? How will the greater C++ community react to this development?” - Proposal writers are encouraged to publish their proposals early and use feedback to refine them until the official review period is underway. - The proposals should be specific about how expenses will be financed, how decisions are made, and how decision makers will be put in place. - For fiscal entities, structure and bylaws should be stated. - All proposals should be reviewed during the same period. - The greater C++ community should be aware and invited to participate in the discussion. - The review period should be 20 days. - We want this to be a civil discussion and encourage everyone to make this a reality. Presume that others in the discussion are acting in good faith. -- David

6 7

Request for information regarding the Boost Foundation
by Robert Ramey 26 Aug '24

26 Aug '24

checking the Boost Foundation website I find some information such as https://sites.google.com/boost.org/boost-foundation/contact which lists the board of directors. Is there more complete information such as: a) link to legal documents such as articles of incorporation, 501(c)3 non-profit paperwork etc? b) Bylaws which among other things would describe the procedure for selection of members of the board, listing what the powers of the board are, etc. c) financial statements for recent years d) List of financial oblications that the foundation has committed to e) any other useful stuff Robert Ramey

3 2

Getting Started with Modular Boost Library Maintenance
by Alain O' Miniussi 26 Aug '24

26 Aug '24

Hi At the bottom of "https://github.com/boostorg/wiki/wiki/Getting-Started%3A-Overview" (why the 2 "wiki"?) there is a "Getting Started with Modular Boost Library Maintenance" link pointing to missing https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/StartModMaint. Where is the page gone ? Thanks ---- Alain Miniussi DSI, Pôles Calcul et Genie Log. Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur Tél. : +33609650665

2 2

Stewardship Review Request
by Vinnie Falco 21 Aug '24

21 Aug '24

Recently the Boost Foundation offered the community two choices of organizations for stewardship of Boost's shared resources: itself, and The C++ Alliance. The project needs a decision, in order that its future may be determined. The Formal Review Process is typically called upon to answer the question of whether a library should be accepted into the collection. I have proposed that we use the same process to determine the question of stewardship. It is not perfect, yet it is both familiar and enduring. Although there are two designated review wizards, one is unavailable and the other is traveling. And review wizards have never been called upon to oversee non-library reviews. Therefore, I would like to add a formal review to the calendar for the following days, inclusive: Monday August 19, to Wednesday, August 28 Here are some review managers who I believe are well-suited for the task: Ion Gatzanaga John Maddock Glen Fernandes Peter Dimov If Glen or Peter accept, it would be appropriate for them to first resign from the Boost Foundation board. Thanks

18 41

Modular Boost building next steps.
by René Ferdinand Rivera Morell 19 Aug '24

19 Aug '24

After some weeks of testing and addressing review comments from authors I have now marked PRs for supporting modular building and use of 156 Boost libraries. There are 2 libraries (multiprecision and utility) that are not ready yet, as they depend on other PRs. After the testing and review I've also concluded that authors (and owners) can merge all ready PRs without waiting for the tool specific PRs. It turned out there were no dependency issues between them. Hence the process is now: * The 1.86 release happened!! * Authors further review and merge the ready PRs. * I fix any fallout from that. * I create subsequent PRs for the global B2 Boost build infrastructure to remove the old non-modular dead code. * I fix any fallout from that. * The 1.87 release happens. Thank you everyone for the help so far. In particular Peter Dimov and Andrey Semashev for the many early comments across various PRs that helped me work out the kinks of the draft PRs. -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supone Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net

2 2

Another question about Boost Documentation
by Robert Ramey 19 Aug '24

19 Aug '24

There are many places where the boostbook xml/xsl files make reference to external files that we have no control of. Here is an example from modular-boost/tools/boostbook/xsl/docbook.xsl <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>  <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" version="1.0"> <xsl:import href="http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/common/common.xsl"/> <xsl:include href="reference.xsl"/> ... This means that if something changes in docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/common/common.xsl We'll have problems when we try to build documentation. This recently happened to me and it was a bitch to find. I spent some time looking around for the right way to fix this and came upon the concept of XML catalogs as explained here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_catalog#Example_Catalog.xml Seems to me that the maintainer of boostbook should verify that my understanding is correct and update boostbook files accordingly. Actually, I'd be grateful to any insight on this subject that anyone might provide. Robert Ramey

2 1

Re: [boost] [compute] Maintenance status
by René Eng 18 Aug '24

18 Aug '24

Hi all I am no expert in OpenCL nor GPGPU, but very interested in this topic and would love to learn more about it. I volunteer to take care of the maintenance of this library. Since I have no experience with the Boost way of handling PRs etc., I guess would need some support from an experienced library maintainer in the beginning. Until now I was a silent reader here, so let me shortly introduce myself: My name is René Eng, 57 years old, living in Switzerland. I am working as a C++ developer for more than 20 years, in the high performance/low latency area. I have experience with some other Boost sub-libraries, in the past also used b2 to build Boost when there were no packages available yet. If there is no-one else with more experience in this topic, who wants to take over this library, I would. This week I am on holiday, so I would actually start to take a closer look into it next week. Best regards René Von meinem iPhone gesendet > Am 21.07.2024 um 17:04 schrieb Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost <boost(a)lists.boost.org>: > It was brought to my attention that Boost.Compute seems to be all but abandoned: > no updates in three years, more than 100 issues filed, 27 unattended PRs. This is a > shame given that the library looks pretty popular based on GH stars and references > on Internet. Are there volunteers to take on maintenance of the library? > > Best, > > Joaquin M Lopez Munoz > > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2 2

Option 1: Alliance stewardship of Boost
by Vinnie Falco 17 Aug '24

17 Aug '24

I believe this is important enough that it needs a thread of discussion split from the original at https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/08/257347.php Some important details seem to have been lost in the conversation. I will summarize the Alliance position in a nutshell: The Alliance will become Boost's steward. Then, we shall assist the Boost Software Commons (a new non-profit created on March 1, 2024) to attain financial independence. Finally we will transfer the shared assets to this new non-profit. Also, I love Boost and I would like the opportunity to help it become a many-generational institution singularly driven to support library development. The message below is reposted in its entirety and without modification. --- I want to start by expressing my gratitude to Kristen, who kept an open and friendly line of communication with me for the last several months. It is unpaid volunteer work, difficult at times, and I appreciate her effort. As a passionate contributor to Boost, I am excited to see renewed growth and positive change in the project. The Boost Foundation has generously offered that the community may determine if the Alliance should be the steward of Boost’s shared resources. The term steward instead of owner is deliberate, as the former reflects the behavior which respects the Boost tradition of consensus-driven decisions. In this communiqué I would like to explore what option 1 looks like from an operational perspective (wearing my Alliance president hat) and then outline my opinion as the author of four Boost libraries. The Alliance is already the largest financial sponsor of the Boost project. Going with the first option means that our relationship to Boost would become formal. What would happen is this: 1. The Alliance becomes the registrant of the boost.org domain. This may take time, but effectively immediately after going with option 1, the Alliance shall fulfill our Domain Name Purchase Agreement under substantially similar terms including the launch of the Beman Scholarship Fund (if there is agreement). The Alliance shall reimburse the Foundation for any and all reasonable legal expenses incurred for both changes of domain ownership, including the estate fees. 2. The Alliance assumes all costs and responsibility to ensure that the boost.org domain registration does not expire, the SSL certificates are renewed and up to date, and that quarterly transparency reports are published to the mailing list apprising the community on the status of its registration. 3. The Alliance assumes all costs and responsibility for maintaining Boost’s cloud services (“Services”). This includes but is not limited to the wowbagger server, the new website, the new mailing list service, the existing mailgun account, and other services which may be required to support Boost’s infrastructure. The mailing list will be upgraded but continue to function as it is currently. Quarterly transparency reports will be published to the mailing list detailing the ongoing expenses and condition of these resources. 4. While the Alliance is the steward of the domain and cloud services, the content of the website and related web applications, such as the release building process, is controlled by the Boost GitHub Organization. Including but not limited to the repositories here: https://github.com/boostorg/website https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2 https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2-docs Changes made to these repositories will go through the existing pull request and review process, which requires community consensus. The Owners, defined as the set of users in the Boost GitHub Organization which have the Owner role, maintain the responsibility for determining consensus. 5. When the Boost community cannot achieve consensus, the responsibility for making a directional decision shall pass to the Boost Software Commons (“Commons”), a 501(c)(3) non-profit registered in Delaware on March 1, 2024, which is not controlled by the Alliance and whose board currently consists of Boost authors. The Commons is now in hibernation until it is needed. 6. The Alliance shall endeavor to help the Commons become capable of independently financing Boost’s infrastructure. The Services cost about $13,000 a year to run, excluding wowbagger and the downloads hosting costs. Our plans include: * Establishing a Boost Patreon * Sales of Boost-branded products at conferences and by mail * Soliciting donations from corporate and private sponsors * Optimizing the Services to reduce cost In all cases, proceeds from fundraising shall go directly to the Commons. 7. When fundraising levels reach the threshold necessary to finance the Services, or earlier upon request by the Commons, the Alliance shall transfer ownership of the boost.org domain to them. At the Commons’ option, the Alliance may continue administering the Services. Why The C++ Alliance? I believe that the Boost Foundation’s governance rules and board composition are simply not structured to put the best interests of Boost first, as can be seen from their own published minutes. The Boost project has been in decline for several years and the Alliance would like the opportunity to do something about it, in a way that is consistent with the project’s values. As our plans require significant financial investments (which we are happy to make), changes are needed. Option 1, Alliance stewardship of shared assets, provides Boost with the opportunity to refresh the foundations of the organization with new ideas, talent, and resources. It offers rescue from stagnation and the rare opportunity to restructure itself to better reflect the project’s changing needs from its inception 26 years ago. While I am excited at the possibility of realizing a dream to increase Boost participation, I am also mindful of the enormous responsibility this comes with. Fortunately I will not have to bear this alone, as there are many new and existing volunteers who are ready to support Boost going forward and ensure its longevity. Thank you for your support!

10 20