CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
202 messages Options
1234 ... 11
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users, existing and prospective.

 

Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers.

 

We understand that the actual process of achieving the end goal will be long, time consuming, and not without its share of conflict. We also recognize that the Boost community is comprised of bright and passionate individuals that are eager to get involved and help get work done.

 

The members of the Steering Committee have been encouraged by the discussions and activity surrounding CMake on the mailing lists over the years and know that many people have voiced visions. We hope that each of you rejoins the discussion to support this initiative and contributes to the common goal of improving Boost’s integration into the broader C++ ecosystem.

 

For the Boost Steering Committee,

Jon Kalb, Chair

[hidden email]

 

 


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our
> desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and
> developers alike.


Once upon a time I came to find Boost not for its libraries but for its
build system. Since that time I've worked hard to improve all aspects of
the build system, the development infrastructure, and at some times
touching every Boost library with patches. Hence it saddens me that this is
the direction the Committee wants to move in. As you can imagine this
decision considerably diminishes my interest in Boost. But such is life :-)

As a consequence.. I herby resign from all my duties in the Boost community
effectively immediately. This means that I will no longer be in the Release
Team. I will no longer manage the CI build infrastructure. I will no longer
be the Testing Manager. I will no longer manager the testing
infrastructure. As for the various Boost related libraries and tools I've
authored or contribute to:

* I will continue to maintain Predef. But will be forking it into a
non-Boost form moving forward (in similar vein to ASIO).

* I will *not* continue to maintain B2 in the Boost form. I will be
rewriting b2 into a new form to address the needs of building software that
matches the industry I work in. I will be doing this immediately.

* I will not be maintaining the testing scripts and tools. Instead I will
be focusing on the set of test reporting infrastructure that I haven't had
time to get back to as my free time has up to now been devoted to Boost
infrastructure improvements.

In general I will be continuing to do what I do.. Just not be doing in the
Boost community. Many thanks for the many wonderful individuals of the
Boost community over more than a decade of my involvement.

Goodby.. Adios.

--
-- 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: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Rene Rivera via Boost
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Goodby.. Adios.

I am truly sorry to hear that. I have always admired your tireless
efforts in an area that most might not consider glamorous and yet is
fundamental and needed for every Boost library. I appreciate the work
that you've done and I hope all your future projects are successful
and rewarding.

Regards

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
> The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users, existing and prospective.
>
>  
>
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers.
>

Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
Steering Committee Google group ?

>  
>
> We understand that the actual process of achieving the end goal will be long, time consuming, and not without its share of conflict. We also recognize that the Boost community is comprised of bright and passionate individuals that are eager to get involved and help get work done.
>
>  
>
> The members of the Steering Committee have been encouraged by the discussions and activity surrounding CMake on the mailing lists over the years and know that many people have voiced visions. We hope that each of you rejoins the discussion to support this initiative and contributes to the common goal of improving Boost’s integration into the broader C++ ecosystem.
>
>  
>
> For the Boost Steering Committee,
>
> Jon Kalb, Chair
>
> [hidden email]


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
Den 18-07-2017 kl. 16:44 skrev Edward Diener via Boost:
> On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:

>> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community
>> our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users
>> and developers alike.
>>
>
> Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
> guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
> Steering Committee Google group ?

Good question!

I find the message from a long time member like Rene quite disturbing,
to say the least.

We evaluated CMake in my company, but decided against it because it
doesn't have support for precompiled headers.

kind regards

Thorsten

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
Am 18.07.2017 um 17:14 schrieb Thorsten Ottosen via Boost:

> Den 18-07-2017 kl. 16:44 skrev Edward Diener via Boost:
>> On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
>
>>> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost
>>> community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake
>>> for users and developers alike.
>>
>> Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
>> guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
>> Steering Committee Google group ?
>
> Good question!
>
> I find the message from a long time member like Rene quite disturbing,
> to say the least.
>
> We evaluated CMake in my company, but decided against it because it
> doesn't have support for precompiled headers.

Have you tried "Cotire" as suggested here as accepted answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/148570/using-pre-compiled-headers-with-cmake

I once tried it several years ago and it seemed to work. However,
pre-compiled headers did not really help us at that time.

Best regards,
Deniz

>
> kind regards
>
> Thorsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Rene Rivera <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As a consequence.. I herby resign from all my duties in the Boost
> community effectively immediately. This means that I will no longer be in
> the Release Team.
>

Since none of the current Boost Steering Committee members are owners in
the Github Boost.ORG organization.. Could one of the github owners please
change my role from "owner" to "member"? (github doesn't allow you to do
that to yourself).


--
-- 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: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Jon Kalb via Boost
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting users and developers.

Isn't it a bit weird to decide this without further input from the community?

It also sounds like you're starting with a solution rather than a problem.



--
Olaf

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Den 18-07-2017 kl. 17:14 skrev Thorsten Ottosen via Boost:

> Den 18-07-2017 kl. 16:44 skrev Edward Diener via Boost:
>> On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
>
>>> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost
>>> community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake
>>> for users and developers alike.
>>
>> Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
>> guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
>> Steering Committee Google group ?
>
> Good question!
>
> I find the message from a long time member like Rene quite disturbing,
> to say the least.

In case it wasn't clear, it's not what Rene says that is disturbing, but
that it has come so far that he has to say it.

Where is all the discussion that led to this decision? The pros and
cons? The feedback from the community and members?

kind regards

Thorsten

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On 7/18/17 6:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike.

  We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide
the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to
consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting
users and developers.

With all due respect to the steering committee, I would have felt a lot
better about this

a) if the solicitations for .. proposals had occurred first

b) announcement of intent would be later and be contingent or some sort
of consensus on a particular proposal.

As it reads - it sounds like a decision has been made to ....  what exactly?

Robert Ramey




_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Louis Dionne
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
Den 18-07-2017 kl. 17:14 skrev Thorsten Ottosen via Boost:
> Den 18-07-2017 kl. 16:44 skrev Edward Diener via Boost:
>> On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
>
>>> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost
>>> community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake
>>> for users and developers alike.
>>
>> Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
>> guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
>> Steering Committee Google group ?
>
> Good question!
>
> I find the message from a long time member like Rene quite disturbing,
> to say the least.

In case it wasn't clear, it's not what Rene says that is disturbing, but
that it has come so far that he has to say it.

Where is all the discussion that led to this decision? The pros and
cons? The feedback from the community and members?

kind regards
There was a lot of discussion on the list recently about various levels of integrations
between Boost and CMake. A lot of interest was generated and we thought it was
very positive. The intent of the message we sent was to make it clear that there was
an intent to actually make something out of these proposals, not to just let them die
like some previous CMake efforts have.

Please notice that the message does not impose any "way of getting there", nor does
it talk about technical superiority of one solution over the other. The problems we believe
Boost needs to solve are

(1) Users have a hard time integrating Boost into their build system, which is CMake
      more often than not (but not always, and we're trying to please the majority here)
(2) Prospective Boost developpers are sometimes driven away from submitting because
      they would have to use Boost's build system, which they don't know.

I can't speak for the Steering Committee as a whole, but I believe that basically any solution
that solves the above two problems would satisfy the intent of the message that was posted.

Louis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Robert Ramey via Boost
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> As it reads - it sounds like a decision has been made to ....  what exactly?

My reading is as follows:

* CMake will be a requirement for all libraries
* Bjam will be optional

I don't presume to speak for the committee, this is my personal interpretation.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Louis Dionne
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
Steering Committee Google group ?
On the mailing list. A few people are also on the #boost Slack channel, but
I think we'd be better discussing exactly what the community should do and
how on the ML, since it's easier to follow.

Louis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Louis Dionne
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On 7/18/17 6:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike.

> We are soliciting comments and proposals from the community to guide  the process and the goals. Our desire is that the community can come to  consensus by the end of the calendar year with a vision of supporting  users and developers.

With all due respect to the steering committee, I would have felt a lot
better about this

a) if the solicitations for .. proposals had occurred first

b) announcement of intent would be later and be contingent or some sort
of consensus on a particular proposal.

As it reads - it sounds like a decision has been made to ....  what exactly?

Robert Ramey
I think I can apologize for the whole SC if this message was perceived as
coming "out of the blue", as this was clearly not the intent. Indeed, ideas
have been floating around on this list these pasts months and we wanted
to make a strong positive statement about our desire to solve the following
problems (which I've mentionned in a previous mail):
 
(1) Users have a hard time integrating Boost into their build system, which is CMake
    more often than not (but not always, and we're trying to please the majority here)

(2) Prospective Boost developpers are sometimes driven away from submitting because
    they would have to use Boost's build system, which they don't know.

Furthermore, there was an implicit understanding that if the community as a
whole objected to any change or could not come to any consensus, nothing
would be forced onto it. However, the _intent_ is clear, and it is that
if we do have a good solution for solving problems (1) and (2), we should
do it (as opposed to rejecting it, like what has happened in the past).

I would love to see the Boost community come together and figure out how
we can solve problems (1) and (2) in the best possible way.

Louis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Louis Dionne
On 7/18/2017 2:08 PM, Louis Dionne via Boost wrote:

> Boost - Dev mailing list wrote
>> Den 18-07-2017 kl. 17:14 skrev Thorsten Ottosen via Boost:
>>> Den 18-07-2017 kl. 16:44 skrev Edward Diener via Boost:
>>>> On 7/18/2017 9:12 AM, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost
>>>>> community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake
>>>>> for users and developers alike.
>>>>
>>>> Where are you soliciting comments and proposals from the community to
>>>> guide the process and the goals ? On this mailing list ? In the Boost
>>>> Steering Committee Google group ?
>>>
>>> Good question!
>>>
>>> I find the message from a long time member like Rene quite disturbing,
>>> to say the least.
>>
>> In case it wasn't clear, it's not what Rene says that is disturbing, but
>> that it has come so far that he has to say it.
>>
>> Where is all the discussion that led to this decision? The pros and
>> cons? The feedback from the community and members?
>>
>> kind regards
>
> There was a lot of discussion on the list recently about various levels of
> integrations
> between Boost and CMake. A lot of interest was generated and we thought it
> was
> very positive. The intent of the message we sent was to make it clear that
> there was
> an intent to actually make something out of these proposals, not to just let
> them die
> like some previous CMake efforts have.
>
> Please notice that the message does not impose any "way of getting there",
> nor does
> it talk about technical superiority of one solution over the other. The
> problems we believe
> Boost needs to solve are
>
> (1) Users have a hard time integrating Boost into their build system, which
> is CMake
>        more often than not (but not always, and we're trying to please the
> majority here)
> (2) Prospective Boost developpers are sometimes driven away from submitting
> because
>        they would have to use Boost's build system, which they don't know.
>
> I can't speak for the Steering Committee as a whole, but I believe that
> basically any solution
> that solves the above two problems would satisfy the intent of the message
> that was posted.

In that case why not have said that Boost libraries and tools will be
supporting CMake, which I think is fair enough given the wish to form a
consensus, but that Boost Build will continue to be developed/supported
for those libraries and tools that still want to rely on it as an
alternative. Given that we have people like Rene, Steven, and Thorsten,
among others, who still work to improve Boost Build, I see such a
decision to give up Boost Build entirely for CMake, before we even know
if we can actually duplicate all the functionality which Boost Build
provides in CMake, as a bad decision.

I am not against providing CMake for the user community at large, but I
just don't think we should be throwing Boost Build away.

>
> Louis
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/CMake-Announcement-from-Boost-Steering-Committee-tp4696934p4696953.html
> Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Louis Dionne
> On 7/18/2017 2:08 PM, Louis Dionne via Boost wrote:
> > I can't speak for the Steering Committee as a whole, but I believe that
> > basically any solution that solves the above two problems would satisfy
> > the intent of the message that was posted.
>
> In that case why not have said that Boost libraries and tools will be
> supporting CMake, which I think is fair enough given the wish to form a
> consensus, but that Boost Build will continue to be developed/supported
> for those libraries and tools that still want to rely on it as an
> alternative.

Because it's not the SC's job to decide whether Boost.Build should be
dropped or not, and the details of how CMake should be supported. If
folks still want to work on Boost.Build, nothing prevents them from
doing so. Boost.Build may or may not be mandatory for being considered
a Boost library going forward, but that's one thing that needs to be
determined by the community.

Louis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Jon Kalb via Boost
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and developers alike.


Thank You!

Finally we will have documented, maintained, human readable and
feature rich build system!
It is so good as I have numerous issues lagging in tickets bug reports
for Boost.Locale that it is almost impossible to fix due to total lack
of support of basic stuff like built in libraries dependencies
search/configuration.

Once Again Thank You.

Artyom Beilis

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 06:12 -0700, Jon Kalb via Boost wrote:

> The libraries produced by the Boost community have had a greater impact on
> the way that the C++ community writes code than any other library
> implementation. The focus of the Boost community will always be on the
> libraries, but it is undeniable that we are dependent on and often limited
> by the infrastructure of our trade. Years ago, the move to Git was
> contentious; yet, it was required to improve development. In a similar vein
> our build system has become an impediment for many developers and users,
> existing and prospective.
>
>  
>
> Therefore, we, the Steering Committee, announce to the Boost community our
> desire and intent to move Boost’s build system to CMake for users and
> developers alike. We are soliciting comments and proposals from the
> community to guide the process and the goals. Our desire is that the
> community can come to consensus by the end of the calendar year with a
> vision of supporting users and developers.

Ultimately, we want to support both use cases for cmake:

* Prebuilt libraries through `find_package`
* Integrated builds through `add_subdirectroy`

I have setup an initial build of cmake that supports this. Of course, there is
more work to be done. To make these changes, I setup scripts that can be used
to generate cmake from mustache templates. This will make it easier to
experiment with different cmake designs as we move forward:

https://github.com/pfultz2/boost-cmake

I mainly was following Daniel Pfeifer's Effective CMake, which is why the
template directory is called effective. However, I am working on some modules
to help generate configuration and to help provide some of the other missing
pieces from boost.build. It can also help reduce the repitition. I would like
to explore this option more as well with community feedback. 



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Louis Dionne
On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 at 15:00 Louis Dionne via Boost <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>
>
> (1) Users have a hard time integrating Boost into their build system, which
> is CMake
>     more often than not (but not always, and we're trying to please the
> majority here)
>
> (2) Prospective Boost developpers are sometimes driven away from submitting
> because
>     they would have to use Boost's build system, which they don't know.
>
> Furthermore, there was an implicit understanding that if the community as a
> whole objected to any change or could not come to any consensus, nothing
> would be forced onto it. However, the _intent_ is clear, and it is that
> if we do have a good solution for solving problems (1) and (2), we should
> do it (as opposed to rejecting it, like what has happened in the past).
>
> I would love to see the Boost community come together and figure out how
> we can solve problems (1) and (2) in the best possible way.
>
> Louis
>
>
>
It has been discussed multiple times that supporting (1) does not require
switching to CMake.

(2) probably does, but from my point of view, that would actually make
boost less usable in my work environment.

I use CMake for all of my personal and open source projects and it's great
for that, but no company I have worked for has used CMake internally for
anything. I'm sure that there are companies that do, but in my experience,
every big C++ shop maintains their own custom build system so switching to
CMake will add a new dependency that didn't previously exist. It's probably
not a deal breaker, but it is a regression because every time I upgrade
boost, I might need to upgrade CMake, and because we don't rely on system
installed packages for anything I would need to upgrade CMake in our
internal package manager before I can upgrade boost. Currently, all I need
to do it write a script called from our custom build system that does
something like;

- call bootstrap
- call b2 with appropriate flags (this is the hard part)
- add the include path
- synthesize the link libraries

What's nice about this is that there are no dependencies -- everything is
completely self contained, and I like that.

For me, from a user point of view, I like things they way they currently
are. I can build boost easily in a work environment with no dependencies
when not using CMake. When I am using CMake, I can easily set BOOST_ROOT
and call FindPackage(Boost) and everything just works. I've had very few
problems with this.

I've never had to deal with boost.build in any significant way, so I can't
speak to how difficult it is. But I feel like this keeps coming up because
some people really don't like boost.build and are tying to force the change
and something the users really want when that's not actually the case when
considering the wider audience.

-- chris

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee

Boost - Dev mailing list
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Chris Glover via Boost <
[hidden email]> wrote:

[snip]

internal package manager before I can upgrade boost. Currently, all I need

> to do it write a script called from our custom build system that does
> something like;
>
> - call bootstrap
> - call b2 with appropriate flags (this is the hard part)
> - add the include path
> - synthesize the link libraries
>
> What's nice about this is that there are no dependencies -- everything is
> completely self contained, and I like that.
>

There is no reason why Boost+CMake can't do that too.

Zach

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
1234 ... 11