Am So., 16. Sep. 2018 um 18:08 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Loskot via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org>:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2018, 14:21 Cem Bassoy via Boost,
wrote: Could perhaps some of the more experienced developers provide sth like a pro and con list comparing cmake and the boost.build system?
IMHO, those have been listed here in countless posts already. One 'just' needs to dedicate one or two hours of life and learn about it from the archive.
Yes the problem is the word 'just'. There is no recap or summary of the discussion so it is quite hard in some cases to identify the pros and cons that are implicitly generated the mailing list. Don't get me wrong. I am not against reading old mails but I doubt that this process takes only one or two hours, especially in case of 'normal' users of the boost build, see e.g. Stefan's answer (active maintainer and developer). IMHO, it might be good for the transition (or inclusion of cmake) to give maintainers and contributers a chance (despite their lack of knowledge and experience) to make up their mind.
Instead of reposting pros/cons here again to make it into yet another forgotten post, those who care and need it should create a table on wiki with clear structured comparison.
Yes. Perfect. That must be enough for all to judge.
However, we should stop arguing CMake vs Build.Boost immediately, unless we have too much time to kill. Instead, we should work out how (not if!) to make room for both camps, Boost.Build and CMake, to co-exist officially and in peace within Boost.
Yes. That is what I meant. Provide technical solutions and *based on the technical solutions* there could be an extra list of pros and cons added and/or script comparison. Every maintainer can then make up their mind what the transition means and whether they 'really' need it. Could that be done? Where should the wiki or sth similar go? Best C
Best regards, Mateusz Loskot
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost