[boost] Re: Boost Sandbox layout?

From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-17 19:41:58

David Abrahams wrote:

> Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>>Was there ever a discussion as to the layout? (A cursory search did
>>not reveal anything)
> 
> I like what I _think_ you're suggesting we actually should do, but
> would you mind spelling it out for everyone's benefit?

I was trying not to prejudice the conversation if there was already 
reasons for the current layout... But since you ask :-)

I think it would more beneficial to have each library in an individual 
sub directory of the boost-sandbox. Each library would still be required 
to follow the regular Boost layout within itself. For example I'm 
putting together the warnings submission and it would be nice to set it 
up like this:

/boost-sandbox/warnings
        /boost/utility/warnings.hpp
        /libs/utility
                /docs/warnings.html
                /test
                        /Jamfile
                        /nowarn_unused_var_test.cpp

Having the isolated subdir would remove the 3 drawbacks I mentioned. But 
itself has some drawbacks:

1) Some of the setup files would be duplicated. Like the boost.png, 
Jamfile, Jamrules, and boost-build.jam at the "top" level. But at the 
same time it means that the library would be truly standalone.

2) An eventual long list of directories right at the top.

One advantage is the reduce complexity of management by the library 
authors. As it would be much easier to do things like remove a library 
from the sandbox after it's been accepted into Boost, a single recursive 
cvs remove and commit instead of finding all the files and dirs.

It might even be possible to setup some form of script automation to 
make snapshots of the individual libraries automatically available 
(without CVS access).

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq