Kenneth, On our project system which is based on Subversion and SCons we have the whole Boost library source and the compiled binaries under version control. Boost isn't rebuilt as part of the SCons build pass, we have shell scripts (Linux, OSX) or batch files (Windows) that devs can invoke if they want or need to. This is a bit cumbersome on the initial checkout, but it does give the devs access to everything they need to compile the project. If a change in Boost compiler flags or defines is required then everyone gets the changes on their next checkout without having to rebuild it all themselves. I've also worked with other organisations that have the Boost source and platform binaries on a network share, and not part of the version control system. Damien Kenneth Porter wrote:
I have an existing C++ project that uses a few 3rd party libraries. It's maintained in a Subversion repository and the libraries are imported into the repository using the Subversion "vendor branch" paradigm together with Subversion "externals".
I want to add Boost to the project, and am looking for guidance from others who have a project in Subversion:
Should I import Boost sources into my repo, rebuilding on each developer's system as part of the normal whole-project build, or should I install a binary distro of Boost on each developer's system? The former guarantees that the repo always contains the source used to build our binaries, but at the cost of longer build times to build Boost each time the project is built.
I'm currently building with Visual Studio 2005 and 2008, and will eventually be cross-compiling for an embedded Linux system.
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users