Subject: Re: [Boost-build] [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee?
From: Douglas Capeci (doug_capeci_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-14 15:10:12
I have found that most cMake advocates don't really understand how much better of a world Boost Build offers. They also have a hard time getting out of the dinosaur cave to give up the old arduous ways of maintaining complex Makefile based build systems to simply learn JAM. I would argue that the current cMake product front-end (and that is all it is...) is the result of cMake developers taking a hard and close look at Boost Build and understanding its elegance and superiority.
On Aug 14, 2017, at 10:52 AM, Rene Rivera via Boost-build wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Douglas Capeci via Boost-build <boost-build_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Our schedules and resources are tight through the end of the year, but certainly I am open to understanding what is required to keep it going for the long-term, so I can decide what resources on my end could be available for helping out.
> I'll keep that in mind when asking for help in the future :-)
> The thing that gets my goat here is that I don't see any clear reasoning or explanation as to why the steering committee has started the process to move in the direction of phasing out Boost Build. Doesn't the user community deserve an explanation of this?
> I thought the reason was obvious.. They decided cmake was the "popular" choice. I.e. it'w what the plurality of users want.
> -- Rene Rivera
> -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
> -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
> -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
> Unsubscribe & other changes: https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build
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