Re: [boost] [Boost-interest] Biicode dependendy manager with Boost support
Le 20/02/15 20:54, JOAQUIN M. LOPEZ MUÑOZ a écrit :
Hi,
The folks at biicode (biicode.com), a C/C++ dependency manager, have just announced support for Boost:
http://blog.biicode.com/dependency-management-boost-libraries/#more-2086
Biicode allows for easy multiplatform component tracking and builiding thanks to their file-based dependency detection and CMake autogeneration magic. Now, these capabilities can be used to make it easier to work with Boost libraries.
Thanks Joaquin for the announce. I was wondering if we couldn't use it as a starting point of our modularization activity. Some questions: * Is the file-based dependency manager what Boost is looking for its own module dependencies detection? * Could an author state explicitly its dependencies on other libraries (versions)? * It Biicode open source? * How its CMake autogeneration and bjam interact? Best, Vicente
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba < vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
* Is the file-based dependency manager what Boost is looking for its own module dependencies detection?
I am exploring how biicode works these days and my current understanding is that if this tool detect a cyclic dependency it will just refuse to work (by design). If I understand correctly Boost cannot avoid some kind of cyclic dependency at the library level, but could avoid if some libraries ("core"?) are gathered.
I was wondering if we couldn't use it as a starting point of our modularization activity. Some questions: * Is the file-based dependency manager what Boost is looking for its own module dependencies detection?
Well, it doesn't handle cyclic dependencies, however, being at the file level it can handle better the dependencies that have "bridge" header files. So say you include serialization, but don't use any of the date time serialization, then it will just pull serialization(instead of pulling in date time as well).
* Could an author state explicitly its dependencies on other libraries (versions)?
Yes, with versions.
* It Biicode open source?
Not yet. Their ultimate goal is to release it as open source, however, their investors are requiring 10000 users before they can release it as open source. I have heard they are trying to convince the investors to release it open source before then. Especially, since biicode can benefit from community support. Furthermore, if boost were to decide to use biicode, perhaps boost could use its weight to influence the decision to go open source.
* How its CMake autogeneration and bjam interact?
Well currently it just calls out to bjam from cmake I believe. You can see the source code for it here: https://github.com/Manu343726/boost-biicode Ideally, I think it would be for boost to switch to cmake as their is more community support for the tool, and it can better integrate into other tools as well. Paul -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Re-Boost-interest-Biicode-dependendy-mana... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Friday 27 February 2015 09:18:15 pfultz2 wrote:
* It Biicode open source?
Not yet. Their ultimate goal is to release it as open source, however, their investors are requiring 10000 users before they can release it as open source. I have heard they are trying to convince the investors to release it open source before then. Especially, since biicode can benefit from community support. Furthermore, if boost were to decide to use biicode, perhaps boost could use its weight to influence the decision to go open source.
I think it works the other way around - I wouldn't like if Boost core infrastructure depended on a proprietary component. Also, though judging by release notes the project exists for more than a year now, I couldn't find any license on the web site. All in all it feels like a green startup to me.
I think it works the other way around - I wouldn't like if Boost core infrastructure depended on a proprietary component.
Yes, of course, but boost could interoperate with biicode without requiring a dependency on biicode.
All in all it feels like a green startup to me.
It is fairly new and whether it becomes the commonly used package manager for C++ libraries remains to be seen. Paul -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Re-Boost-interest-Biicode-dependendy-mana... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (4)
-
Andrey Semashev -
Klaim - Joël Lamotte -
pfultz2 -
Vicente J. Botet Escriba