-----Original Message----- From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga via Boost Sent: 19 July 2017 16:21 To: boost@lists.boost.org Cc: Ion Gaztañaga Subject: Re: [boost] CMake Announcement from Boost Steering Committee
On 19/07/2017 16:33, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
Organizationally speaking, what needed to be done? First, we choose which scenario we prefer. Second, the SC appoints a person in charge of realizing the plan. If gradual, he sets off to work with the results immediately appearing in Boost as libraries are picked up by the CMake test/build infrastructure one by one. If sudden, he sets off to work on his branch. When ready, the SC votes on the switch.
So far I have left unspoken something that everyone should have picked up - the role of Rene in all this. It's patently obvious that a gradual transition would be much (much!) harder without him around, so we've pretty much ruled that possibility out now. This was, in my opinion, completely unnecessary.
Or was it?
The CMake issue has been around for years and hasn't been able to progress primarily because "obviously biased" vocal minorities were holding it back with threats.
To put it bluntly, did the glorious CMake transition HAVE to start with killing the workhorse and driving away the rider who got us where we are?
Thanks Peter. I think you've expressed very precisely what I (and maybe others) think.
We want both Rene and Jon in Boost.
+1 And we need lots of new blood capable of implementing Boost using CMake with lots of time and energy, enthusiasm and stamina. Paul --- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830