Niall Douglas wrote:
On 9 May 2014 at 12:45, Stephen Kelly wrote:
If this is the case, then the main change I would suggest is that Boost needs to be easier to work with. Currently, the modular thing works kinda OK but it's a giant PITA to fork.
It is a giant PITA, partly because it is not modular. The git migration was a migration to 100 fractured git repos, not modularized git repos.
If you want to modularize, then decide that that is a goal for Boost and I will help.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/245078
I think at least one of the reasons my efforts did not get support from the right people is that modularization is not currently a goal for Boost. Some people in Boost think that modularization is already done. It is not.
One of the KEY absolute must have feature of a C++ 14 only Boost refresh would be per-library source distros.
You might be talking about duplication. I'm not sure.
In other words, there is a separate source distro for each Boost14 library which contains just enough of Boost for that library. One can, of course, copy multiple source distros into the same directory tree to combine libraries.
That will forever break the perception that to use one library you need all of Boost. It also brings in proper dependency tracking from the beginning.
Boost14 would also be the right time to start modular and stay modular from the beginning.
This sounds like another 'big bang' (expect explosions). However...
I'd forget about modularising compatibility Boost, it is what it is.
Given that no one else responded on this point, it seems conclusive: Boost doesn't want to make any steps (which I previously showed to be possible) toward a goal of modularizing the code before the big bang described above. Thanks, Steve.