-----Original Message----- From: Boost
On Behalf Of Stefan Seefeld via Boost Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 7:43 PM On 2018-09-14 12:14 PM, mike via Boost wrote:
[...] Sorry, that never worked. New tools and processes appear (and disappear !) all the time. That's no reason to impose on any project maintainer to switch to whatever is en vogue.
Actually, it works quite well outside of boost. As I said, we are not talking about following the latest hype here but the de-facto standard for cross-platform C++ projects.
Again, I'm not arguing for or against a specific set of tools. I'm arguing against the very idea to force >150 projects to adopt the same.
Imho, as long as boost tries to provide a joint release and distribution mechanism and there is such a tight coupling between the libs, at least the public interface (how do I tell a library, which compiler and flags to use and how does a library tell me what it's dependencies are) should be standardized just as it is now. Also, far more than 150 Projects have adopted cmake (or at least provide a cmake interface).
So, to get back to the original announcement: all your effort and good intentions notwithstanding, I believe you shouldn't even try to contribute such infrastructure, unless of course your are fully committing to maintain it all, i.e. allow me to forward each and every bug report I'm going to receive on my projects that is related to that build logic.
As long as we are talking about genuine bug reports and not feature request: Sure
Stefan
Mike