Re: [boost] [rfc] dynamic overload: a new version is out

From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-02 02:23:38

Hi Jens,

On 11/1/07, Jens Seidel <jensseidel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 08:48:34AM -0700, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> > You should be able to access the overload implementation at
> > http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/overload/trunk -- this version
> > is derived from Marco Ceccheti's implementation, with certain changes
> > for complying with some Boost rules about filenames (length, etc.) and
> > directory layout.
>
> Are you sure the directory layout is OK? I would not expect to see
> trunk in http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/overload but the content
> of it. Branches belong to
> http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox-branches so
> http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/
> should always contain

> the trunk version without need to create an additional directory called
> "trunk". At least the logging library doesn't use "trunk".
>

I'm talking about the directory layout as far as the root of the
project is concerned. This follows the convention of Boost libraries
that can easily be 'untarred into the Boost Root directory, and play
nice with the other boost libraries'. As far as using trunk is
concerned, I haven't seen any rules as to how a self-contained
development environment can be maintained for the whole sandbox, which
all the other libraries will have to follow.

As far as I can tell (or at least as far as subversion goes), a branch
is basically a copy of a source tree in another directory. There are
no hard-coded conventions, and I don't see one for the sandbox.

> Let me summarise:
> Instead of http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/overload/trunk/boost
> I would expect http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/overload/boost.
>
> If I'm wrong other projects should maybe restructered for consistency.
>

I don't think either of us are wrong or right. I think it's a matter
of preference as far as the sandbox is concerned -- and on a
per-project basis, I think it should be alright to have different
approaches. After all, all the stuff there isn't official by an Boost
standard IIRC.

> > The above announcement should be very a welcome change for you. I hope
> > this helps!
>
> It does, thanks!
>

You're welcome. Have fun!

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.
[http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com/]
[mikhailberis_at_[hidden]]
[[phone]]
[[phone]]