Re: [boost] Vault: still needed?

Subject: Re: [boost] Vault: still needed?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-23 01:08:28

on Thu Jan 22 2009, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>>> But my understanding is that it contains things that may never become
>>> official part of Boost. In that case, the vault provides means for
>>> distribution of Boost-related files, for which SVN is inadequate for
>>> the same reason it's inadequate to be the only way to distribute Boost
>>> itself.
>>
>> I'll bite. What is "the same reason [SVN is] inadequate to be the only way
>> to distribute Boost itself" and why should this have anything to do with the
>> sandbox as a way to distribute Boost-related software ?
>
> I mean, we could distribute Boost by placing releases in SVN (let's
> say in a "releases" folder), and have users download them through the
> web SVN access, but instead we distribute Boost through SourceForge.

The main reason for that is that SF has mirrors which can handle the
traffic.  Doesn't really apply to sandbox stuff.

> This is simpler than having to dig through the SVN repository to
> figure out what to download, etc.

Hmm,
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=7586&package_id=8041&release_id=637761

vs

http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/vault/xxx

I like the latter better.

> The Boost Vault is similarly simpler than a giant SVN tree (I suppose
> the word "inadequate" was a bit excessive.)

In what way is it simpler?  It appears to be a giant directory tree, too.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com