Re: [Boost-users] What's happened to Ryppl?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] What's happened to Ryppl?
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-28 13:46:17

>> The current approach implements the view of Boost as a
>> particular set of libraries ONLY built/tested/distributed as an
>> whole.
>>
>> My view is that is not scaling well and can never do so.
>
> +1
>
> Still, that doesn't mean we're going to be more nimble and scalable if
> there's no standardization of tools across Boost.  Quite the contrary,
> IMO.  I can imagine all kinds of problems coming up that are simply
> ruled out by using the same tools.

+1 from me, we must IMO have standardized tools - whatever we decide those 
are - otherwise what you're proposing is the complete fragmentation of Boost 
into something even more unmanageable than now.

I still haven't heard from the git proponents, what's wrong with using 
git-svn to manage a local - i.e. distributed - git repository, and then 
periodically pushing changes to SVN.  In other words working with git just 
as you normally would, except for having to type "git svn" from time to 
time?  This isn't a rhetorical question BTW, I've never used either git or 
git-svn, so I clearly don't know what I'm missing ;-)

John.

PS, just looked at the git website, and it appears that us Windows users are 
restricted to either Cygwin or MSys builds?  If so that appears to be a 
major drawback IMO.... OK I see there's a TortoiseGit, but it looks 
distinctly immature at first glance, and still depends on MSys (i.e. no easy 
integrated install)?