Subject: Re: [boost] Vault: still needed?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-23 01:39:26
on Fri Jan 23 2009, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:08 PM, David Abrahams >> 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.
> I appears that I've misinterpreted what the vault really is. You're
> right, it's also a giant directory tree, the main difference seems to
> be that it contains "packages" as opposed to raw files. Or am I off on
> this too? :)
> I still don't understand why it makes sense for the vault packages to
> be in SVN, but the official Boost distribution has to be in
Mirrors and traffic, my man. We could switch the SF thing, but when we
make a new release and people all over the world hit our SVN server,
taking it down and stopping development, you'll wish we were using the
SF release system again.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk