Re: [boost] Library devs only: Boost v2.x distro design questions

On 24. Oct 2018, at 21:12, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:

Splitting this off from the other thread, can I get feedback from Boost library maintainers ONLY. Not users, not non-maintainers.

Since boost.histogram was accepted (conditionally)….

Q0: Are you willing to do the work to adapt your library for any Boost v2.x distro if it were to happen?

Yes.

Q1: Would you prefer a new, separate Boost v2.x distro in parallel to the v1.x distro, or to keep everything within one v1.x distro?

I didn't follow the discussion enough to understand the question.

Q2: Would you be intending to keep your library inside Boost v1.x, move it exclusively to Boost v2.x, or have it exist in both Boost v1.x and v2.x but with different defaults configured? Also, would the version in v1.x be hard forked from any v2.x edition i.e. the v1.x edition would get orphaned?

There should be only one official version of the library, so Boost v2.x exclusive.

Q3: What C++ standard should Boost v2.x's master build system be defaulted to? C++ 11, 14, 17 or 20?

C++14.

Q4: Should Boost v2.x use a boost2 namespace, or namespace boost { inline namespace v2 { }}? (This affects whether Boost v2 and v1 editions of your library can be used within the same translation unit)

inline namespace.

Q5: What master buildsystem should Boost v2.x use? Boost.Build, cmake, Build2, something else?

cmake.

Q6: Should Boost v2.x's libraries auto integrate individually into some package manager? If so, which ones do you intend to support?

Yes.

Q7: Should Boost v2.x have official release versions done by release managers, or should it be a rolling release of "whatever last passed the CI @ 100%"? Note that you can have this, and have official release versions of "especially known good" editions too.

Rolling releases.

Q8: Should Boost v2.x use a local HTML server to serve documentation, and the static HTML docs be dispensed with as a requirement?

No preference.

Q9: What are your feelings towards the use of Python to script infrastructure and tooling in any Boost v2.x? For example, Python to run a local HTML server to serve documentation locally, or Python to build a release etc

Python is awesome and becoming the de-facto default scripting language. More Python please.

Q10: What parts of core Boost are you utterly dependent upon, and would absolutely need ported to any Boost v2.x as no STL alternatives exist?

core, callable_traits, multiprecision PS: Excellent comments by Vinnie and follow-up by Edward. Lol.