Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: Fwd: [boost] Library devs only: Boost v2.x distro design questions
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-24 20:07:20

On 2018-10-24 04:00 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> Hi Stefan, Christian,
> Shall we agree on common ground for GIL?
> I think it would be better to speak as a team than posting
> individually - there's enough chaos already :-)

...but as I'm speaking for multiple library projects, I felt compelled
to answer individually already. (Hope my answers weren't too much
out-of-line with your expectations ;-) )

> I personally am willing to leave the answer to Stefan,
> as GIL team representative who is also interested
> and experienced regarding general Boost development
> direction, architecturing building, packaging configuration etc.
> We are already at C++11, but I don't mind jumping to C++17.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure I understand what Niall is driving
at. If we were looking for an opportunity to remove cruft from
Boost.GIL, a move to "Boost 2" may provide such an opportunity. But
then, we are already pretty liberally removing reliance on old
standards, so not much would change for GIL itself. Right ?

But, moving to a fictitious "Boost 2" may provide an opportunity to
break free from other problems we are being plagued with, notably
concerning infrastructure. Things as moving towards full modularity or
autonomy (choice of tools, build and release processes, etc.) would
become easier to achieve. But then, given the specific questions Niall
asked, I'm very much in doubt that that's what he has in mind.

Perhaps he just felt inspired by the discussion(s) triggered by Robert's
various threads.


       ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

Boost list run by Boost-Gil-Owners