[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: python-cpp-sig
Subject: Re: [C++-sig] New Major-Release Boost.Python Development
From: Ralf Grosse-Kunstleve <rwgrosse-kunstleve () lbl ! gov>
Date: 2011-08-25 23:26:52
Message-ID: CAPbyqJFZh48_t3OzVCLJaKsD9-LgofnUmE5UWGLg6NLB7f5deA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
Hi Jim,
CC to Dave.
This is great news.
My main interests have been stability and not increasing the memory
footprint of boost.python extensions. I'm not in a position to further
develop boost.python.
Troy and Ravi have done a significant amount of work. I hope they will
comment for themselves.
I'd prefer if developments stayed under the boost umbrella, e.g. as
boost/python/v3, but I don't feel very strongly about this.
Ralf
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Jim Bosch <talljimbo@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to start work on a new major release of Boost.Python. While the
> library is currently well-maintained in terms of bugfixes, I get the sense
> that neither the original developers nor the current maintainer have the
> time or inclination to work on new features. I'd also like to propose some
> changes that are slightly backwards-incompatible, as well as some that mess
> with the internals to an extent that I'd feel better about doing it outside
> Boost itself, to make it easier for adventurous users to play with the new
> version without affecting people who depend on having an extremely stable
> library in Boost.
>
> To that end, I'm inclined to copy the library to somewhere else (possibly
> the boost sandbox, but more likely a separate site), work on it, produce
> some minor releases, and re-submit it to Boost for review. Perhaps the
> external site would continue on as the home of more fine-grained releases,
> or maybe we would fully reintegrate with Boost at that point (especially if
> Boost addresses some of its own project management and release control
> issues by that point, which I know is being discussed but to my knowledge
> doesn't really have a timeline yet).
>
> I am willing to take the lead on this project; I have a number of features
> that exist as extensions in the boost sandbox already that would work better
> if they could be more fully integrated into the Boost.Python core, and I
> think I have the necessary understanding of the full code base to coordinate
> things. I'd like to save a full discussion of what features a new version
> would include for another thread, but I am hoping other people on the list
> might volunteer some time to work on aspects they have coded up elsewhere -
> I know many such extensions exist.
>
> So I have a few questions for anyone who's paying attention:
>
> - For the original Boost.Python developers and current maintainers, and
> other people familiar with developing Boost libraries: do you have any
> preference on how to approach this? I don't want to step on any toes,
> especially toes attached to people who are responsible for the excellent
> library we already have.
>
> - For other Boost.Python experts on this list: do you have existing code or
> development time you'd like to contribute?
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jim Bosch
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Cplusplus-sig mailing list
> Cplusplus-sig@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/**mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig>
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
Hi Jim,<div><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">CC to \
Dave.</div></div><div><br></div><div>This is great news.</div><div>My main interests \
have been stability and not increasing the memory footprint of boost.python \
extensions. I'm not in a position to further develop boost.python.</div> \
<div>Troy and Ravi have done a significant amount of work. I hope they will comment \
for themselves.<br>I'd prefer if developments stayed under the boost umbrella, \
e.g. as boost/python/v3, but I don't feel very strongly about this.</div> \
<div><br></div><div>Ralf</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 \
at 1:59 PM, Jim Bosch <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:talljimbo@gmail.com">talljimbo@gmail.com</a>></span> \
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px \
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> I'd like to start work on a new major release of \
Boost.Python. While the library is currently well-maintained in terms of bugfixes, I \
get the sense that neither the original developers nor the current maintainer have \
the time or inclination to work on new features. I'd also like to propose some \
changes that are slightly backwards-incompatible, as well as some that mess with the \
internals to an extent that I'd feel better about doing it outside Boost itself, \
to make it easier for adventurous users to play with the new version without \
affecting people who depend on having an extremely stable library in Boost.<br>
<br>
To that end, I'm inclined to copy the library to somewhere else (possibly the \
boost sandbox, but more likely a separate site), work on it, produce some minor \
releases, and re-submit it to Boost for review. Perhaps the external site would \
continue on as the home of more fine-grained releases, or maybe we would fully \
reintegrate with Boost at that point (especially if Boost addresses some of its own \
project management and release control issues by that point, which I know is being \
discussed but to my knowledge doesn't really have a timeline yet).<br>
<br>
I am willing to take the lead on this project; I have a number of features that exist \
as extensions in the boost sandbox already that would work better if they could be \
more fully integrated into the Boost.Python core, and I think I have the necessary \
understanding of the full code base to coordinate things. I'd like to save a \
full discussion of what features a new version would include for another thread, but \
I am hoping other people on the list might volunteer some time to work on aspects \
they have coded up elsewhere - I know many such extensions exist.<br>
<br>
So I have a few questions for anyone who's paying attention:<br>
<br>
- For the original Boost.Python developers and current maintainers, and other people \
familiar with developing Boost libraries: do you have any preference on how to \
approach this? I don't want to step on any toes, especially toes attached to \
people who are responsible for the excellent library we already have.<br>
<br>
- For other Boost.Python experts on this list: do you have existing code or \
development time you'd like to contribute?<br> <br>
<br>
Thanks!<br>
<br>
Jim Bosch<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
Cplusplus-sig mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Cplusplus-sig@python.org" \
target="_blank">Cplusplus-sig@python.org</a><br> <a \
href="http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig" \
target="_blank">http://mail.python.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig</a><br> \
</blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic