Boost logo

Boost Interest :

Subject: Re: [Boost-cmake] Analysis of the current CMake system
From: Brad King (brad.king_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-15 09:23:19

troy d. straszheim wrote:
> There is a lot to discuss here. I'll go back later and make specific
> comments. It'd be great to talk in person at boostcon, (boostcon rocks,
> by the way.)
> I understand/agree with a lot of your points (especially bulkiness, and
> the need to reduce the number of toplevel targets), in most cases
> because I've learned more about cmake since I implemented what is
> currently on the boost trunk.

Great. I'll wait for your specific comments to continue discussion.

> Brad King wrote:
>> In summary, I'd like to help you folks address these issues. Some of
>> the work will be in Boost's CMake code and some in CMake itself. The
>> work will benefit both projects. We can arrange to meet at BoostCon,
>> but we can probably get alot of discussion done on this list before
>> then. BTW, can anyone suggest a preferred format for a BoostCon
>> session from the boost-cmake-devs' point of view?
> I don't personally see a formal presentation to boost-cmake devs as
> being useful, there just aren't enough of us (last I checked there
> were three). I'd suggest we just sit down together... there are
> plenty of conference rooms available at all times.

Sure. We can look at the conference schedule when it is available and
choose a time to meet.

> The boost-cmake-for-users talk could of course reflect whatever we
> get done between now and then.

Has anyone submitted anything for this yet? We (Kitware) can present
our CMake/CTest/CDash/CPack software process in general, but the
boost-specific part should probably be done by one of its authors or
maintainers. Do you want to do a combined (two-part) session, or should
I submit a separate proposal for the general part?


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