On 15.03.2017 12:16, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
If we at least could segment the bad libraries into a "bad Boost" distro, it would be a huge improvement.
Speaking of segmentation (I'm deliberately avoiding to comment on your rant about flaws in specific libraries): I think it's a huge waste of effort that the attempt to modularize Boost is stalled. It could be really useful if pushed further, but in its current state is almost useless to users as well as most developers. Once Boost libraries are decoupled and autonomous, the "Boost branding" would take on a different meaning, as users could more freely and deliberately pick what Boost library they want as part of their development (as well as runtime) platform. Likewise, I still don't understand why build and test infrastructure keeps being a central issue (in particular a "brand damaging" one, as you state). Providing helpful tools for library developers to use is certainly useful, but shouldn't be in any way constraining. And if people strive for accelerated growth, trying to push for universal policies and tools becomes an ever increasing problem. Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...