Re: [boost] Radical idea for repository structure

From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-17 21:54:17

On 9/17/07, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>

[snip]

> > Thoughts?
>
> Question 1: Does that mean different Jamfiles are needed for releases vs
> SVN working copies? That is too error prone - a way would have to be
> found so that the same Jamfile works regardless of whether it is run
> against a release or a SVN working copy.

We can have only the SVN directory structure. People can have a
complete include directory with bjam install. Which could copy headers
from all libraries there.

> Question 2: Let's say lib A depends on lib B, and B in turn depends on
> lib C. Does that mean lib A's Jamfile must list both B and C? If such
> transitive dependencies have to be listed, that's a problem because if C
> gets changed to depend on lib D, then the Jamfile for A, B, and C all
> have to be changed, and that's a mess. OTOH, if only direct dependencies
> have to be listed in the Jamfile, it might possibly work.

It is transitive. No need to type dependencies of dependencies in the jamfiles.

> Question 3: What about developers who use an IDE or traditional make
> files? For example, using the VC++ IDE, the "Additional Include
> Directories" property is currently set to $(BOOST_ROOT) and you are
> done. On IDE's where this sort of property can be inherited, you only
> have to specify that in one place, and all Boost compiles work
> correctly. With your scheme it sounds like every library used will
> require an additional include path, and that path will be different for
> release compared to SVN working copies. That gets old fast. Or have you
> figured out a simpler way?

Just type bjam install and use it.

>
> Curious,
>
> --Beman

Best regards,
-- 
Felipe Magno de Almeida