[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFICPP-1100?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marc Parisi updated MINIFICPP-1100:
-----------------------------------
Description:
Per the discussion of MINIFICPP-1026, I think using and referencing boost lib
for not only this component but also others is ideal.
"Yep. I was 1. My gut suggestion was to use boost's base 64 since it's
relatively isolated. If you look at the boost variant they mention portions
come from this repo ( [https://github.com/ReneNyffenegger/cpp-base64])"
Since we have increased the build with static libs we might as well begin
explore simply using boost directly. The size of the build is moot at that
point. We should have rationale why custom libs are added to our core when
alternatives exist that are more widely used.
Build time, if we only reference portions of boost, should not increase
dramatically.
was:
Per the discussion of MINIFICPP-1026, I think using and referencing boost lib
for not only this component but also others is ideal. Further since we have
increased the build with static libs we might as well begin explore simply
using boost directly. The size of the build is moot at that point. We should
have rationale why custom libs are added to our core when alternatives exist
that are more widely used and thus reduce our threat footprint.
"Yep. I was 1. My gut suggestion was to use boost's base 64 since it's
relatively isolated. If you look at the boost variant they mention portions
come from this repo ( [https://github.com/ReneNyffenegger/cpp-base64])"
> Explore using external sources for base 64 lib
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MINIFICPP-1100
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFICPP-1100
> Project: Apache NiFi MiNiFi C++
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Marc Parisi
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 0.7.0
>
>
> Per the discussion of MINIFICPP-1026, I think using and referencing boost lib
> for not only this component but also others is ideal.
> "Yep. I was 1. My gut suggestion was to use boost's base 64 since it's
> relatively isolated. If you look at the boost variant they mention portions
> come from this repo ( [https://github.com/ReneNyffenegger/cpp-base64])"
>
> Since we have increased the build with static libs we might as well begin
> explore simply using boost directly. The size of the build is moot at that
> point. We should have rationale why custom libs are added to our core when
> alternatives exist that are more widely used.
> Build time, if we only reference portions of boost, should not increase
> dramatically.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
