Re: [Boost-users] BoostCon & Bjam

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-12 14:01:26

Jeff Garland wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Tim St. Clair <timothysc_at_[hidden] 
> <mailto:timothysc_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
> 
>> Folks -
>> 
>> I've heard various mumblings from sources regarding the future of
>> BJAM, and I would honestly like to know what the verdict is.
> 
> Dave Abrahams suggested in the Future of Boost session that it seems
> likely Boost will move away from bjam at some future point.  When
> that will be isn't clear.

That wasn't my understanding. I gathered that there would eventually be 
CMake support for Boost, and that the test infrastructure would be 
integrated with it via Bitten or something like it. CMake would also be 
used to build the binary installers that BoostPro offers. But I didn't 
hear anybody say that BJam support would be dropped, or that BJam 
development would cease.

>> I've also heard a lot of smack about it, which I consider to be more 
>> dogma then anything.  Also, I must say, as a cross platform developer
>> I have yet to find it's equal, and would perfer to illuminate
> 
> It may be, but for every person that thinks like you there's some or
> more that have issues with bjam.

"Smack" and "dogma" are your characterizations of a reasoned discussion.

>> dogma where it may exist, vs. throwing up our arms hold heartedly. If
>> that means developing a users guide to help "boost" them into bjam,
>> then I would be happy to contribute.

Thank you for offering to help. Since nobody (AFAIK) is suggesting we 
drop BJam, your help documenting it would be greatly appreciated.

> I think the predominate issue is the maintenance of the build system
> itself -- there are very few people that can maintain boost build
> and we'd rather not be in the tools business where other options
> exist.

True, and a users' guide won't help with that. We need a maintainers 
guide, too.

-- 
Eric Niebler
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com