-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Chambers Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 4:01 PM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] New name of bjam.exe
On 7/22/2010 9:22 AM, Roland Bock wrote:
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? There have been a lot of names proposed and quite a bit of dissension about the name changing at all due to build
However, I'm pretty sure the names not derived from "Boost.Build" are disqualified because they would either defeat the purpose of the renaming or
I think we should immediately remove both boob, baby and babe from the list. Google searches will be too revealing ;-) Paul script breakage. they would
require rebranding of Boost.Build in its entirety. And the concerns about build script breakage are nullified if my suggestion of leaving a (deprecated) bjam wrapper executable to call the new executable is used. So that still leaves a pretty long list, but at least they're all quite similar: bb bbv2 bbuild bboost boostie boosty buildb bmake bbmake baby babe b2 bbl bam bbt boob boobi
Apologies if I missed a few. -Matt
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost