Vladimir Prus wrote:
Boosters,
I am sure that most of you got accustomed to typing "bjam" in console whenever you want to build things. This name is old, and derives from a tool named "jam", which is even older (around for maybe 20 years). However, this name is probably no longer good.
First, having a single project be identified by both "Boost.Build" and "bjam" names proves inconveninent from "marketing" and conveninence standpoints, to the point where many users try to read documentation for Boost.Jam, don't find anything there, and become upset.
Second, users get the idea that Boost.Build is somehow related to "Classic Jam", which is not true.
For those reasons, Rene and I have decided that "bjam.exe" should go. We're thinking about naming the executable simply "build.exe", since no other build tool bothered to take it.
Does anybody have comments, or better suggestions?
Thanks, Volodya
Reading the contributions to this thread makes me wonder: How is this ever going to be decided? Is there a policy for changing names within boost? - Is it a democratic decision? - Or can the maintainers rename their stuff in whatever way they like? - Or do we need a review manager who will organize a review once the maintainers have come up with a new name? Regards, Roland