On 31. mai 2015 20:28, Peter Dimov wrote:
Bjørn Roald wrote:
On 31. mai 2015 12:22, Peter Dimov wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
I've mentioned before that I would very much prefer if we didn't have >> libraries within libraries in the libs structure.
I've mentioned before that I agree, but will say so again.
Is it really a question of libraries within libraries in the boost library sense where a library is maintained by individuals or a group of individuals. Or are this just allowing structure within a library, where subdirectories with its own standard structure may for instance be optional parts of the library which when used add additional dependencies.
It is basically a question of removing the current special case of libs/numeric/* and not introducing any others. The libraries in numeric/ are already in their own separate repositories.
sure, but among other effects such a restriction will have is that further modularization likely will require a lot of tiny git axillary repositories to handle optional glue between boost libraries or glue to optional external technologies. That is if not an alternative, perhaps superior, method to manage such optional dependencies can be realized. I sort of dislike the extremely hard tie between a git repository and the physical layout of directories in it. Some standard structure is clearly needed, but allowing this to recurse does not seem too hard or very unreasonable. If someone want to have more structure within their repository, that ought to be allowed. Detecting subdirectories with the conventional directory structure is one posibility, another is to require such subdirs to be declared explicitly when needed, which is very common in many build systems. Just my 0.05$ anyways. -- Bjørn