[bext-sml] Adding new port of boost::sml

[misirlou-tg]

Adding new port of boost::sml

• What does your PR fix?

  [New Port Request] boost::sml #20799

• Which triplets are supported/not supported? Have you updated the CI baseline?

  all, No

• Does your PR follow the maintainer guide?

  Yes

• If you have added/updated a port: Have you run ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committed the result?

  Yes

If you are still working on the PR, open it as a Draft: https://github.blog/2019-02-14-introducing-draft-pull-requests/

[yurybura]

I think boost-ext-sml is more clear name for this port.

[misirlou-tg]

I was following the example of bext-di and bext-ut, they are all a part of https://github.com/boost-ext

[yurybura]

I was following the example of bext-di and bext-ut, they are all a part of https://github.com/boost-ext

I've just checked DI and UT documentation. Sorry, but I haven't found these examples. I've only found that the boost-ext-ut package is available from Conan Center.

[misirlou-tg]

Those two I brought up are already ports in vcpkg, https://github.com/microsoft/vcpkg/tree/master/ports/bext-di and https://github.com/microsoft/vcpkg/tree/master/ports/bext-ut

I don't mind changing it, I just don't know if consistency or a more readable name is better.

[yurybura]

I see. Thank you. But I think searching by name boost will be very useful. Let's wait opinion of maintainers.
I vote to rename bext-di and bext-ut too)

[PhoebeHui]

I think the name is fine, See #16302 (review)

[niclar]

I think the name is fine, See #16302 (review)

bext is a terrible prefix. you could also change the regexp

[yurybura]

I think the name is fine, See #16302 (review)

I don't understand from the comment why boost-ext library shouldn't contain boost in the name.

[BillyONeal]

I think the name is fine, See #16302 (review)

I don't understand from the comment why boost-ext library shouldn't contain boost in the name.

This library is not in boost, so it should not use boost- as a prefix. Just because the library wants to claim that it's part of boost, it isn't part of boost until the boost maintainers have accepted it.

[yurybura]

I think the name is fine, See #16302 (review)

I don't understand from the comment why boost-ext library shouldn't contain boost in the name.

This library is not in boost, so it should not use boost- as a prefix. Just because the library wants to claim that it's part of boost, it isn't part of boost until the boost maintainers have accepted it.

In source code everybody must use boost:

#include <boost/di.hpp>
#include <boost/sml.hpp>
#include <boost/ut.hpp>

Why in the package name boost is forbidden? IMHO bext is awful prefix.

[vicroms]

For the main registry we are not changing our stance on these two things:

• Libraries not officially affiliated with Boost should not use the boost- prefix.
• The boost-ext-XYZ prefix is not enough since it could collide with an hypothetical official ext-XYZ library.

If I recall correctly the bext- prefix was picked by a contributor to boost-ext/di and we have used that prefix for at least one other port. Therefore the argument to keep using the bext- prefix is to keep consistency. If you want to propose a new name I would suggest to consult with the boost-ext org maintainers for their opinion.

An alternative is to create a private repository that uses boost-ext- for these libraries and promote it in the community registries thread.

@misirlou-tg since you're the author of this PR. If you're ok with the current port name let me know so I can merge it.

[niclar]

@vicroms thanks for clarifying. -On the other hand you could just move it, if the hypothetical library realizes.

[yurybura]

@vicroms Thank you for your detailed answer.

[misirlou-tg]

@misirlou-tg since you're the author of this PR. If you're ok with the current port name let me know so I can merge it.

Yes, I am OK with the name

[BillyONeal]

Thanks!