Boost logo

Boost-Build :

Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Boost build documentation
From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-13 02:13:45

On 08.05.2013 13:46, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Edward Diener [mailto:eldiener_at_[hidden]]
>> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 8:33 PM
>> To: boost-build_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [Boost-build] Boost build documentation
>> On 5/6/2013 2:44 PM, Thomas Suckow wrote:
>>>> The Boost build documentation at
>>>> says 2006-2009.
>>>> Has it really not been updated in 4 years ?
>>> That webpage is indeed 4 years old.
>>>> If it has not been updated in 4 years, could it not be updated if
>>>> changes have been made to Boost build ?
>>> Boost build has had numerous changes. I would use the nightly, not the
>>> latest "stable" version.
>> If Boost build has had numerous changes in the last 4 years I do not understand why the web pages
> have
>> not been updated to reflect those changes. Every link within Boost's general documentation, on the
>> website and in the releases, which refers to Boost Build points to that web URL.
>> What is the point of having documentation which does not reflect the current status of Boost Build
> as
>> the official documentation for the product on the web ?
>>>> If it has been updated in the meantime could the dates be changed to
>>>> reflect when it was last updated ?
>>> I think the source contains newer documentation, but not much. The
>>> information that would be really useful would be the modules that ship
>>> with boost-build.
>> There are lots of other things I have been told about Boost Build, usually by the kindness of
> Steve
>> Watanabe answering my questions, which is not in the Boost Build documentation at the URL above.
> It is
>> hardly just about the modules which ship with Boost build, although knowing more about them would
>> also be helpful.
> We've accepted much kindness from Steven Watanabe and many others, but collectively, we Boosters
> have failed to get the accumulated knowledge about Boost Build into our documentation.
> And the number of queries that are repeats suggests that we have abused their kindness.
> Despite the noble efforts of Daniel and others, several bits of key documentation, initially
> state-of-the-art, are way out of date.
> IMO, this is because we have restricted the access to add to the documentation to too few people,
> partly through limiting write-access, but mainly from not having a 'standard' Boost-way of producing
> docs and updating them.

Do we have any write-access limits? I am not aware of any.

That said, if overall open-source landscape is any indicator, documentation is probably just not
interesting enough for anybody to contribute :-(

- Volodya

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at, david.abrahams at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at