[Xorp-hackers] Future Xorp development?

[Bruce Simpson]

On 02/26/10 22:47, Ben Greear wrote:
> Considering Xorp.inc folded, I'm curious if anyone (with upstream commit privileges)
> is planning any more significant changes to xorp?
>
> In particular, does anyone still care about using libboost?  If not, I'm very tempted
> to remove it to get rid of a big external dependency.
>    

As discussed off-list: We are using Boost, and we're sticking to it. We 
don't use libboost, but we do use its regex. That is the state of the 
changes which went in up until the XORP, Inc. business failure.

What people do in their own branches is their business, but any official 
or semi-official supported offering in future would continue to use it, 
as it's a requirement for the IPC refactoring which was long overdue.

It seems reasonable that a large C++ system such as XORP, make use of 
C++ innovations such as Boost, and the change would have happened a long 
time ago, had it not been for organisational confusion, and a lack of 
developer traction.

One big problem with XORP at the moment is that a number of 
organisations, it seems, have been using the code, but haven't publicly 
disclosed their interest, or participated in development process, 
fund-raising, etc.

regards,
BMS