From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-06 06:50:04
David Abrahams wrote:
>> OK, but why are you leaning toward it? The only reasons you've given so
>> far are that Cmake is not developed/supported by Boost.Build people,
> It has a large and responsive developer community, with a large user
> community to support, and peoples' salaries depend on that support.
You mean Kitware developers' salaries? I think it's quite likely that
some of their time is officially allocated for free support, for
marking purposes. However, it seems unlikely that you'll get unlimited
support for unlimited period of time, for free.
>> The first I still think is a mirage as compared to the people
>> supporting BB.
> You think support for Cmake is a mirage? In what sense?
> In my experience the support for BB is, in practice, and despite the
> best efforts of a few dedicated individuals, insufficient. Someone
> who uses Boost.Build was just telling me today that with Cygwin
> support appearing to drop, an express dislike for supporting VC++ on
> the part of BB's main maintainer,
"express dislike for supporting VC++"? Would you please don't put
words in my mouth, and they using those words in argument?
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk