Thomas Klimpel wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
- 'boost' directory, that has assorted headers supposedly meant for future.
- 'libs' directory, with various libraries
Both directories are deprecated since a long time. I think it is now the time to explicitly send notices to the very few developers that still keep using the boost and libs directories. Maybe we could then move the "boost" and "libs" directories to an "old" or "deprecated" folder, to really be explicit about their status.
/sandbox /libraries /proposed-lib1 /boost /libs
The currently agreed structure (<http://www.boost.org/community/sandbox.html>) is
/sandbox /proposed-lib1 /boost /libs
If the only reason to change this structure is that a few developers failed to follow that structure, this doesn't seem fair to the vast majority of developers that tried to follow that structure. Each change of structures is potentially confusing for the users of a sandbox library, especially if there are already too many different versions of the library out there anyway. And it will invalidate links given in archived email answers to user questions.
+1
/branches
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Well this has the same link problem as moving to the proposed libraries to /libraries. I would place here branches of accepted libraries with a big development, to make clear what is a proposal and what is already accepted. The Vault could also follow a clean-up, and replace files that have already been integrated in Boost, as it was done for xpressive, ...
Comments?
If we are unhappy with the current situation, I suggest we could change the statement "We encourage developers to migrate these projects to the project-centric organizational structure." from <http://www.boost.org/community/sandbox.html> to something more mandatory.
+1 Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Sandbox-cleanup-tp3063197p3064101.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.