- Boost - lists.preview.boost.org

[release] Reminder: Master Branch closes for all changes this WEDNESDAY August 7th
by Marshall Clow 05 Aug '24

05 Aug '24

For the 1.86.0 release. The calendar is here: https://www.boost.org/development/index.html — Marshall P.S. If you have change notes, don’t forget to add them to the website.

1 0

Re: [boost] A Follow Up to My Original Note Re The Future of, Boost
by John Phillips 03 Aug '24

03 Aug '24

On Thur, Aug 1, 2024 at 6:37?AM Vinnie Falco via Boost < boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 1:52?PM Kristen Shaker via Boost < boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > ...let the developers make a decision on how they would like to proceed Thank you, and this is very much in the Boost tradition. While the Boost Software License is likely to be the project's most impactful contribution, the Formal Review Process is a close second. Therefore, I propose that the question of custodianship be decided by a formal review. It is becoming more and more difficult to find suitable review managers who are not associated with the C++ Alliance (a self-inflicted wound, I suppose) but I nominate these as candidates: Ion Gaztanaga John Maddock Thanks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I understand the desire to use something like the review process for this, but I think we need to be cautious about the differences between a software review and what we need in this case. Not that there is no way to do something similar to a review, but just to make sure we understand what the review process is good at and not good at. The intent of the review process is to let interested developers share ideas and expertise to find the best technical solution. The proposed library is the focus of the discussion but in some cases the conversation can range far from the proposal. The allowed outcomes include fully accepting the proposal, provisional acceptance with stipulations, or rejecting the proposal with constructive commentary about how it could be improved to have a more positive reception. All the participants on this list know this, but consider how the review process compares to what is needed in this conversation. We're trying to solve organizational and legal issues, instead of implementation and documentation issues. We want to decide what path would best allow us to proceed with our core tasks of producing high quality, real world usable libraries for inclusion in a broad spectrum of software uses, leading to refinement of implementation and interface so we can have a solid proposal for inclusion into the C++ standard. What organization would give the work we do the needed visibility so developers and companies around the world want to try the Boost libraries? What leadership would give our developers sufficient insight into the needs of C++ developers at large required to provide for those needs? What what resources will allow us to solve the technical and legal issues in our structure and infrastructure that we need to continue to mature and grow effectively? These aren't questions I personally have the technical and organizational expertise to judge well. Nor are they questions that someone could provide a sample implementation for during a review to illustrate a potential pitfall. They are however questions where some members have a strong personal stake and contention could cause lasting and damaging rifts between the volunteers that are the heart and soul of Boost. It is also true that reviews tend to have just the three outcomes listed above, while this process could come to conclusions no one has even thought of to mention, yet. I also think that to be useful it will need extensive involvement from as many Boost participants as possible. You can have a good technical review of a library that is dominated by half a dozen experts in the problem and techniques to address it. This review will need input from half or more of the Boost community to produce the broad buy in that such organizational decisions should get. This is again not to say it can't be done. I am only trying to make sure that we understand the possible ways a review of this sort will be far different from the normal reviews we perform. John Phillips Review Wizard

1 0

Notice of Intent To Redirect boost.org to boost.io
by Vinnie Falco 02 Aug '24

02 Aug '24

All: A consensus to launch the new Boost website was reached by both the community and the Boost Foundation. Since then, the Foundation has: * Ignored the consensus decision reached in April [1] * Prevented the C++ Alliance's attempt to secure the boost.org domain [2] * Launched the competing "Beman Project" [3] * Voted to "cut ties with the Alliance" [4] * Avoided important questions asked on the mailing list, for over a month As it is clear now that Foundation control of the boost.org domain may be harmful to Boost, the existing website will be redirected to the new website. Absent objection, this pull request to redirect boost.org to boost.io will be merged on August 5, 2024: https://github.com/boostorg/website/pull/861 Thanks [1] https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/04/256602.php [2] https://cppalliance.org/pdf/Domain-Name-Purchase-Agreement.pdf [3] https://www.bemanproject.org/ [4] https://cppalliance.org/pdf/Boost-Foundation-Minutes.pdf

6 11

Re: [boost] A Follow Up to My Original Note Re The Future of Boost
by Adam C Getchell 01 Aug '24

01 Aug '24

> On Aug 1, 2024, at 3:31 PM, boost-request(a)lists.boost.org wrote: >> >> Here are what we believe to be the available options. >> >> 1. >> >> The C++ Alliance assumes control of the Boost assets, including the >> boost.org domain name. The Boost Foundation becomes uninvolved in any >> decisions related to the Boost Libraries. +1. My perspective is that I’d like to spend as much time possible writing code to solve scientific problems, rather than fighting with package managers, build systems, and bugs in libraries lacking maintainers to fix them. As far as I can tell, except for the efforts of particular library authors and the C++ Alliance, Boost has been largely stagnant. I support efforts to keep Boost and C++ relevant. Otherwise, folks like me will probably write new code in Rust rather than dealing with these issues. Adam P.S. To be fair, that ship has probably sailed for some of us. [1] [1] https://engineering.01cloud.com/2024/08/01/tractor-automating-the-transitio…

1 0

Master branch is now open for bug fixes
by Marshall Clow 31 Jul '24

31 Jul '24

The master branch is now open for bug fixes and documentation changes. Other changes by release manager permission, as described in https://github.com/boostorg/wiki/wiki/Releases%3A-Beta-Merge-Policy Release manager permission is not needed for test changes or documentation changes. The next deadline: On August 7th, master closes for all changes. As always, the calendar is at https://www.boost.org/development/ — Marshall

7 11

Requesting permission for a trivial change to LEAF
by Emil Dotchevski 29 Jul '24

29 Jul '24

It would be nice to include in the current release this small change that marks leaf::result objects as nodiscard: https://github.com/boostorg/leaf/commit/1f745805553934cd76a241649cd9bafa277… . Thanks, Emil

1 0

[release] Boost 1.86.0 beta 1 released
by Marshall Clow 26 Jul '24

26 Jul '24

Boost release 1.86.0 beta 1 is now available at: https://boostorg.jfrog.io/artifactory/main/beta/1.86.0.beta1/source/ The SHA256 checksums are: 6c3b6b6b1760090ebd658b764c9006d9579df2a20763ede356e059fe52989277 boost_1_86_0_b1.tar.bz2 cc0e5c0fb54ea8762c2eb9fbfd185cb8ccbe1ad33c218883f9438dbe2f9a795b boost_1_86_0_b1.zip cad677f5b746bd83c68131766554b56ebf40eb7ba94823526b03820db9dbc049 boost_1_86_0_b1.7z 82b59c0ca4d3b8bbf910ffdbbf535ef738fa1d648b8ba6f2608b516a58f89c55 boost_1_86_0_b1.tar.gz Release notes (still need updates): https://www.boost.org/users/history/version_1_86_0.html Please try the beta and report any problems you encounter. Thanks to everyone who contributed to the release. Thanks especially to Sam Darwin for his help with the tools, and figuring out what happend with RC3. -- Boost Release Team

1 0

Re: [boost] [release] Boost 1.86.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 4 is available
by tobi＠die-loews.de 26 Jul '24

26 Jul '24

1 0

[release] Boost 1.86.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 4 is available
by Marshall Clow 25 Jul '24

25 Jul '24

[ RC3 was malformed as a result of some tooling failures ] The fourth (and hopefully final) RC for the 1.86.0 Beta release is now available. Available at: https://archives.boost.io/beta/1.86.0.beta1/source/ The SHA256 checksums are as follows: cad677f5b746bd83c68131766554b56ebf40eb7ba94823526b03820db9dbc049 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc4.7z 6c3b6b6b1760090ebd658b764c9006d9579df2a20763ede356e059fe52989277 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc4.tar.bz2 cc0e5c0fb54ea8762c2eb9fbfd185cb8ccbe1ad33c218883f9438dbe2f9a795b boost_1_86_0_b1_rc4.zip 82b59c0ca4d3b8bbf910ffdbbf535ef738fa1d648b8ba6f2608b516a58f89c55 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc4.tar.gz Changed libraries between RC2 and RC4: Boost.Process fixed some build issues on Windows As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. -- The Release Managers

5 7

Boost 1.86 release notes?
by Andrzej Krzemienski 25 Jul '24

25 Jul '24

Hi Everyone, Are 1.86 beta release notes available anywhere? I recall that the beta release documentation used to be put on boost.org. Regards, &rzej;

2 1

[release] Boost 1.86.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 3 is available
by Marshall Clow 24 Jul '24

24 Jul '24

The third (and hopefully final) RC for the 1.86.0 Beta release is now available. Available at: https://archives.boost.io/beta/1.86.0.beta1/source/ The SHA256 checksums are as follows: a632d1e1465804b26f4d73112f1142c89caf74b026395df2e63a8c8972ac3ab0 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc3.tar.gz e061d83644568178ddece4bd3e241fb2656f49d6157c5d9fbff6c2fa74b1e328 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc3.zip e7f07bbc14915469b1ef80337c16e7a592f3eb547ba2cca828253c0a32372399 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc3.tar.bz2 91dcd8f980362c1c32bf8cc547c547fb02619bea877738b478c052926edc6a2d boost_1_86_0_b1_rc3.7z Changed libraries between RC2 and RC3: Boost.Process fixed some build issues on Windows As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. -- The Release Managers

1 1

[release] Boost 1.86.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate 2 is available
by Marshall Clow 24 Jul '24

24 Jul '24

Available at: https://archives.boost.io/beta/1.86.0.beta1/source/ The SHA256 checksums are as follows: c62c9ab3c448ef4ed1b45f69631e3d7cc425fca96b991e5007b3af49f84344e1 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc2.zip 7e5b42428ed30a7ac9d832e9df9f5150a29d9cffe5aebde4d4c109da89f54b77 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc2.tar.gz 8718b092b37f04a739b647d154901d923fb3c3cdcff9f793d6a472e3f8e7c647 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc2.7z cd63cd3110fafbed8c196a82dd0f72c8600bc5c7fc218ede213947da3b721c06 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc2.tar.bz2 Changed libraries between RC1 and RC2: Boost.Process Boost.Odeint As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. -- The Release Managers

3 3

[release] Status of the Beta release
by Marshall Clow 24 Jul '24

24 Jul '24

We’ve had some problems with the RCs for the 1.86.0 beta. The RC1 had problems with Boost.Odient and Boost.Process. We had an RC2 yesterday, but that didn’t fix all of the Boost.Process build problems. There will be an RC3 today, which (hopefully) will fix them . If nothing else is found the beta release will be Friday. — Marshall

1 0

[release[ Boost 1.86.0 Beta 1 Release Candidate is available
by Marshall Clow 23 Jul '24

23 Jul '24

Available at: https://archives.boost.io/beta/1.86.0.beta1/source/ The SHA256 checksums are as follows: 90be7ebbaf1c81a849791eb0f49d05a9ec7dbd0ec98b974dfe31d44d811e8298 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc1.7z 543ca3b743250a8b24b25c71209cf911c35613910e78a320835c21c053212ef2 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc1.tar.gz 1bf831ed717fa3e01db6c1f104b95f5a6a8d098a4cc9e61fa6eb81969c78645f boost_1_86_0_b1_rc1.tar.bz2 f739f8761bee6006c60a39fd21ed80b7b0a681c9ed448d1ae1bb28d8d8a69659 boost_1_86_0_b1_rc1.zip As always, the release managers would appreciate it if you download the candidate of your choice and give building it a try. Please report both success and failure, and anything else that is noteworthy. -- The Release Managers

7 13

[Release] Master branch is closed for beta
by Marshall Clow 23 Jul '24

23 Jul '24

Master is closed for all changes. See the release schedule at: https://www.boost.org/development/index.html -- Release managers

3 4

Q2 2024 Transparency Report on Boost C++ Library
by Louis Tatta 22 Jul '24

22 Jul '24

Hello, Louis Tatta here, CEO of The C++ Alliance, Inc, a registered 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to supporting C++. This is our Q2 2024 transparency report on our charitable work for the Boost C++ Library Collection. The C++ Alliance actively seeks out highly talented and experienced C++ experts, hiring them, often full-time, so they can fully dedicate themselves to open-source projects. Our Staff Engineers maintain existing Boost libraries, develop new ones, and contribute to other Boost projects. We also employ IT experts full-time to maintain and enhance the infrastructure supporting Boost. This includes the legacy web server, the Drone continuous integration servers, deployment scripts for GitHub Actions on Boost repositories, and scripts that publish Boost releases. Additionally, we provide on-demand technical support services for Boost authors and maintainers facing infrastructure-related issues. The Boost Mailing List remains the premier venue for high-quality discussions on Boost libraries and related C++ Standards topics. The C++ Alliance continues to support the mailing lists, upgrading them to the latest Mailman version and developing an optional web-based front-end for browser-based interaction. We also manage the Official C++ Language Slack Workspace ( https://cpp.al/slack) hosting the most popular interactive discussions on Boost libraries. The C++ Alliance sponsors a paid plan to offer full history, video and audio conferencing, collaboration tools, and unlimited document storage for seventeen dedicated Boost library channels and one main Boost discussion channel. Our largest project for Q2 2024 is the ongoing development of the new Boost website. This new site will be a C++ social media portal with rich support for user-generated content and a robust back-end that provides visibility into contributions made on GitHub and the release process. Our goal is to deliver an enhanced user experience that attracts fresh talent to Boost. Notably, the website features hand-drawn graphics by our contract artist, reflecting our commitment to ensuring Boost not only functions well but also looks visually appealing. In Q2 2024 there were a total of zero Boost Formal Reviews. There were two petitions for endorsement for potential Boost candidates: *async_mqtt from Takatoshi Kondo (https://github.com/redboltz/async_mqtt) *multi from Alfredo Correa (https://gitlab.com/correaa/boost-multi) There's another MQTT library in the works proposed on Nov 2023, Async.MQTT5 from Ivica Siladic, Bruno Iljazovic and Korina Simicevic ( https://github.com/mireo/async-mqtt5) There were a total of three messages from the @Boost_Libraries X (formerly Twitter) account, all submitted by C++ Alliance team members. One of them featured artwork from Bob Ostrom, commissioned by us. Posts with visuals are three times more engaging than those with just text. We see the X platform as a vital tool for educating newer generations about the benefits of Boost. A total of $526,000 was spent on Boost-related contributions, broken down thusly (and rounded to the nearest thousand): Staff Engineers Compensation $392,000 Website Software Development $111,000 Server Hosting $23,000 During Q2 2024 we employed a total of 13 individuals to contribute to Boost. Here is a high-level summary of accomplishments: Sam Darwin (Chief Technical Officer) - Summary: Sam Darwin led major projects, overseeing the integration of new features in the Boost infrastructure. He coordinated between teams, ensuring smooth transitions and high-quality deliverables. His leadership was pivotal in the development of the new Boost website and improvements to the mailing list system. - Link: Sam Darwin's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/sam/2024/07/10/SamsQ2Update.html> Dmitry Arkhipov (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Dmitry Arkhipov focused on maintaining and enhancing Boost libraries. He implemented several bug fixes, optimized existing code, and contributed to the development of new libraries. Dmitry also played a significant role in the continuous integration and deployment processes. - Link: Dmitry Arkhipov's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/dmitry/2024/07/12/dmitrys-q2-update.html> Alan de Freitas (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Alan de Freitas worked extensively on the Boost website redesign, particularly on the back-end systems that support user-generated content and GitHub integration. He also contributed to developing new libraries and maintaining existing ones. - Link: Alan de Freitas's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/alan/2024/07/13/AlanQ2Update.html> Christian Mazakas (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Christian Mazakas worked on enhancing Boost’s infrastructure, including optimizing server performance and improving deployment scripts. His contributions were crucial for maintaining the stability and efficiency of the Boost libraries. - Link: Not provided. Krystian Stasiowski (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Krystian Stasiowski focused on developing new features for existing Boost libraries and worked on performance optimizations. His work included contributing to the ongoing development of new libraries and providing technical support to other Boost authors. - Link: Krystian Stasiowski's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/krystian/2024/07/15/KrystiansQ2Update.html> Peter Turcan (Senior Technical Writer) - Summary: Peter Turcan was responsible for creating and updating documentation for Boost libraries. He ensured that all new features and libraries were well-documented, making it easier for users to understand and utilize Boost’s capabilities. - Link: Peter Turcan's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/peter/2024/07/07/PeterTurcan-Q2-2024.html> Matt Borland (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Matt Borland contributed to the development of new libraries and enhancements to existing ones. His focus was on improving library performance and ensuring that the codebase remained robust and reliable. - Link: Matt Borland's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/matt/2024/07/08/Matts2024Q2Update.html> Ruben Perez (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Ruben Perez worked on several infrastructure projects, including server maintenance and optimization. He also contributed to the development and maintenance of Boost libraries, focusing on performance improvements and bug fixes. - Link: Ruben Perez's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/q2_update/2024/07/09/RubenQ2.html> Mohammad Nejati (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Mohammad Nejati was involved in developing new libraries and improving existing ones. He focused on optimizing code and ensuring that Boost libraries were efficient and reliable. His work also included providing technical support to other developers. - Link: Mohammad Nejati's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/mohammad/2024/07/10/MohammadsQ2Update.html> Fernando Pelliccioni (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Fernando Pelliccioni contributed to the ongoing development of the Boost libraries, focusing on implementing new features and optimizing performance. His work was instrumental in ensuring the high quality and reliability of Boost libraries. - Link: Fernando Pelliccioni's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/fernando/2024/07/08/FernandoQ2Update.html> Joaquin M Lopez Munoz (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz worked on several key projects, including the development of new Boost libraries and enhancements to existing ones. His contributions focused on improving code efficiency and performance. - Link: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/joaquin/2024/07/06/Joaquins2024Q2Update.html> Kenneth Reitz (Staff Engineer) - Summary: Kenneth Reitz focused on developing and maintaining Boost libraries, implementing new features, and optimizing existing code. His work also involved providing technical support and contributing to the Boost website redesign. - Link: Kenneth Reitz's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/kenneth/2024/07/12/KennethQ2Update.html> Braden Ganetsky (Junior Staff Engineer) - Summary: Braden Ganetsky, as a junior engineer, contributed to various Boost library projects. His work included implementing new features, fixing bugs, and assisting with infrastructure maintenance. Braden’s contributions were valuable in supporting the overall development efforts. - Link: Braden Ganetsky's Q2 Update <https://cppalliance.org/braden/2024/07/14/BradenQ2Update.html>

6 8

Modular Boost status..
by René Ferdinand Rivera Morell 21 Jul '24

21 Jul '24

Yesterday I created PRs for each library that introduces the changes to build (and some code) to implement the modular B2 building. I track all the PRs here: <https://github.com/users/grafikrobot/projects/1/views/2> All the library PRs are in Draft status, as we wait for the tool related PRs to get merged. You can read an explanation of the changes here <https://github.com/grafikrobot/boost-b2-modular/blob/b2-modular/README.adoc> (the explanations may differ slightly from current reality). IMPORTANT: The PRs are all "Draft" as I continue to monitor build errors from any CI errors in the PRs. And to address feedback from authors. After the current release the process will go something like this: * I fix any current fallout in draft PRs. * The 1.86 release happens. * The owners merge the tool PRs to develop and master. * I fix any fallout from that. * Authors, and owners, merge library PRs to develop and master. * I fix any fallout from that. * I create subsequent PRs for the global B2 Boost build infrastructure to remove the old non-modular dead code. * The 1.87 release happens. Questions? -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supone Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net

1 0

[compute] Maintenance status
by Joaquin M López Muñoz 21 Jul '24

21 Jul '24

It was brought to my attention that Boost.Compute seems to be all but abandoned: no updates in three years, more than 100 issues filed, 27 unattended PRs. This is a shame given that the library looks pretty popular based on GH stars and references on Internet. Are there volunteers to take on maintenance of the library? Best, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz

1 0

Should include of quadmath.h in multiprecision/cpp_bin_float.hpp be guarded with ifdef BOOST_MATH_HAS_QUADMATH_H?
by Martin Jambor 19 Jul '24

19 Jul '24

Hello, because of a bug[1] in GCC 13 and earlier versions, the #include of quadmath.h in multiprecision/cpp_bin_float.hpp did not fail even when the header file was not present on the system and compilation succeeded as long as nothing from the header file was actually needed. The bug has been fixed in GCC 14 which all of a sudden leads to new build requirements and failures such as [2]. Examining this build failure, I noticed that in math/special_functions/fpclassify.hpp (which is indirectly included from multiprecision/cpp_bin_float.hpp) the existence of the header file is specifically tested and macro BOOST_MATH_HAS_QUADMATH_H is defined or not accordingly. So I wanted to ask the question in the $subject. Could, or perhaps even should the include (together with its uses introduced in commit 4911125248bd) be guarded also by BOOST_MATH_HAS_QUADMATH_H and not just by BOOST_HAS_FLOAT128? Thank you, Martin [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80753 [2] https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1225861#c7

2 1

Boost Foundation, Boost, and the Beman Project
by Peter Dimov 19 Jul '24

19 Jul '24

Hi all, I recently brought up (by e-mail) the subject of the relationship between the Boost Foundation and the Beman Project before the BF board. I expressed the opinion that, since the Boost Foundation's primary purpose is to support Boost, the Beman Project should eventually have its own backing entity (foundation/nonprofit), instead of the existing Boost Foundation supporting both. David Sankel responded, quoted Boost Foundation's mission statement: "The Boost Foundation’s broad C++ mission is: (a) development of high quality, expert reviewed, legally unencumbered, open-source libraries, (b) inspiring standard enhancements, and (c) advancing and disseminating software development best practices. It does this by fostering community engagement, nurturing leaders, providing necessary financial/legal support, and making directional decisions in the event of Boost community deadlock." and helpfully pointed out that it very much doesn't say that supporting Boost is the primary purpose of the Foundation. And indeed, if one pays attention to the above, one would notice that Boost only appears once, at the end, somewhat incidentally, and as an afterthought. Unsurprisingly, I disagree. I think that the primary purpose of an entity named "the Boost Foundation" should be to support Boost, and if it currently isn't, something not quite right. At the moment I'm not proposing anything yet; this is purely informative. But no matter how I look at it, I see a pretty fundamental difference of opinion, which we'll need to deal with at some point.

12 32

Re: [boost] Boost Digest, Vol 7285, Issue 2
by Adam Getchell 19 Jul '24

19 Jul '24

> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:38:58 -0700 > From: Vinnie Falco <vinnie.falco(a)gmail.com> > To: boost(a)lists.boost.org > Cc: Robert Ramey <ramey(a)rrsd.com> > Subject: Re: [boost] New Logo Discussion > Message-ID: > <CA+EzHGfmxMdhD04BCYz4Rvzk663KejBa+8QDF1fX84ZW1A3Ytg(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 12:42?PM Robert Ramey via Boost < > boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > >> FWIW - I much prefer the current logo which was developed by community >> inclusive process with many submissions and designs. >> > > Thanks. Upon reviewing my initial post I think I could have communicated > more clearly. Will everyone please vote on one of the following two options: > > 1. Boost adopts the proposed new logo with Alliance as custodian of the > trademark > > 2. No change I’m not sure I’m a voting member, but I like the new logo. Thanks also for doing all the legal review stuff. -- Adam Getchell https://adamgetchell.org <https://adamgetchell.org/>

2 1

Re: [boost] New Logo Discussion
by Joel de Guzman 18 Jul '24

18 Jul '24

On 7/18/24 9:36 AM, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 6:50 PM Joel de Guzman via Boost > <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: >> On 7/18/24 3:49 AM, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 2:42 PM Robert Ramey via Boost >>> <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: >>>> On 7/17/24 11:59 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: >>>>> Hi. It is CppCon 2024 season, and the C++ Alliance is working on letting >>>>> people know all the new and exciting things happening in Boost. We're doing >>>>> this with Boost labeled conference shirts, and a beautiful brochure. You >>>>> can see a draft of this promotional piece here (note: work in progress): >>>>> >>>>> https://cppalliance.org/pdf/Boost-Brochure-CppCon-2024.pdf >>>>> >>>> FWIW - I much prefer the current logo which was developed by community >>>> inclusive process with many submissions and designs. >>> It wasn't. The logo picked by the community in that process was never >>> used. What is currently used was the result of private design between >>> the Boost Steering Committee and the artist that "won" that logo >>> contest. >> That is not correct. I was one of the major proponents of that logo contest (if not >> spearheded it). >> And I am not a member of the Boost Steering Committee. That contest was public and was >> discussed in the Boost list. It is NOT a private design. >> >> Here's part of the discussion (I do not have time to search all): >> https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost//2005/03/81416.php >> >> You can see clearly I was asking for votes. > I did not claim the logo contest was not community driven and resulted > in a community choice. I would know, as I submitted 11 designs in that > context. What I claimed is that the **current** logo was not chosen by > a community process. As the **current** logo was NOT the winning logo. > The winning logo (actually four) was a single, or trio, of stacked > cards (see attached). And as you can see it is very different from > what we have now. I am confused. The winning logo is the beehive design by Zoltan Juhasz https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boost.png I should know, I tallied the votes. I have no idea what that design you attached is. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman Cycfi Research, Inc.

3 3

Re: [boost] New Logo Discussion
by René Ferdinand Rivera Morell 18 Jul '24

18 Jul '24

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 8:36 PM René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <grafikrobot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 6:50 PM Joel de Guzman via Boost > <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > > > On 7/18/24 3:49 AM, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 2:42 PM Robert Ramey via Boost > > > <boost(a)lists.boost.org> wrote: > > >> On 7/17/24 11:59 AM, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: > > >>> Hi. It is CppCon 2024 season, and the C++ Alliance is working on letting > > >>> people know all the new and exciting things happening in Boost. We're doing > > >>> this with Boost labeled conference shirts, and a beautiful brochure. You > > >>> can see a draft of this promotional piece here (note: work in progress): > > >>> > > >>> https://cppalliance.org/pdf/Boost-Brochure-CppCon-2024.pdf > > >>> > > >> FWIW - I much prefer the current logo which was developed by community > > >> inclusive process with many submissions and designs. > > > It wasn't. The logo picked by the community in that process was never > > > used. What is currently used was the result of private design between > > > the Boost Steering Committee and the artist that "won" that logo > > > contest. > > > That is not correct. I was one of the major proponents of that logo contest (if not > > spearheded it). > > And I am not a member of the Boost Steering Committee. That contest was public and was > > discussed in the Boost list. It is NOT a private design. > > > > Here's part of the discussion (I do not have time to search all): > > https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost//2005/03/81416.php > > > > You can see clearly I was asking for votes. > > I did not claim the logo contest was not community driven and resulted > in a community choice. I would know, as I submitted 11 designs in that > context. What I claimed is that the **current** logo was not chosen by > a community process. As the **current** logo was NOT the winning logo. > The winning logo (actually four) was a single, or trio, of stacked > cards (see attached). And as you can see it is very different from > what we have now. Trying this again because the attachment was too big. :-( See pair of individual images. -- -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supone Nada -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net

1 0

Where is Boost.Parser?
by Vinnie Falco 17 Jul '24

17 Jul '24

Boost.Parser was accepted on February 28th but it is not in the superproject, and the last commit in the source repository is from four months ago. I am developing a Boost brochure for CppCon 2024 and I'd like to go to press with Boost.Parser as a listed library, so this is a blocker. Thanks

3 5

Rephrased: Building Boost for MacOS / clang
by Stephen Greenfield 17 Jul '24

17 Jul '24

On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 Richard Hodges wrote: > This usually happens because you're compiling with one standard library > (e.g. libc++, the default on clang) while your boost libraries were > compiled with another (e.g. libstdc++, the default on gcc). I've recompiled my MacOS program for GCC (GNU C++17) and linked with libstdc++ to be compatible with the default build of Boost. Your suggestion WAS the solution to my reported slew of error messages. Thanks! QUESTION 1: But for building a standard MacOS or iPhone/iPad app, shouldn't I be building both my app and Boost for clang, so I can link with libc++? When I looked at the list of toolsets in the "getting started with unix variants", included with the 1_85_0 .zip package, there was no listing for toolset=clang or toolset=clang-darwin. Nor is there any mention of clang on: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_85_0/more/getting_started/unix-variants.ht… QUESTION 2: So what is the proper toolset / build instructions to build for MacOS using the clang C++17 compiler? Stephen

1 0