Nicola Musatti wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
Matt Doyle wrote:
[mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Witt FWIW users that depend on v1 can always use 1.33.x Doesn't this seem rather Microsoft-ish? I'm thinking of .NET, the attitude was you wouldn't accept it when we offered it to you so now we're going to force it on you. And, if you really don't want .NET you can always use VC6.5. Do you see the parallels here? There is one significant difference, Boost.Build is not a Boost library. It's a tool Boost uses to make the the distribution and building easier. I.e. BB is independent of the Boost releases.
If it is then it should have been developed separately, tested, released and only then integrated into Boost, at the start of the first subsequent release cycle. As it is Boost appears to be a gigantic unit test for Boost.Build.
We did do that for BBv2, or I should say mostly Volodya has done that. BBv2 has had releases now for more than 3 years <http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=7586&package_id=80982>. And has seen most of it's use outside Boost for those 3 years. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo