Subject: Re: [boost] Review Queue Needs Attention
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-26 16:38:31
>>>>>>> (And a state not damned with faint praise like 'unstable' - which is perhaps
>>>>>>> better described as 'likely_to_be_improved' rather than actively 'not stable').
>>>>> The apache incubator might be a more appropriate inspiration than
>>>>> Debian unstable.
>>>> the current sandbox layout has the disadvantage, that single projects
>>>> are present as sandbox/mylib, which do not run or compile on their own,
>>>> but require a full set of the boost headers. in order to try out one
>>>> sandbox library, you need to get the boost checkout/tarball and copy it
>>>> to sandbox/mylib or vice versa ...
>>> Just to clarify -- what is wrong with starting with checkout of 'main'
>>> Boost tree, and then doing 2 "svn co" per any sandbox library you want
>>> to try?
>> not sure, whether i understand it correctly. if i check out trunk and
>> sandbox/mylib to myboost/ ... then myboost would contain 2 independent
>> svn checkouts ... does `svn diff' show the diff with trunk or with
>> sandbox/mylib then?
> "svn diff" without arguments will show difference in 'main boost'
> "svn diff boost/mylib libs/mylib" will show the difference for the specified
> library -- but this is probably obvious.
> Is this a problem and what alternatives do you suggest?
well, both checkouts wouldn't be synchronized ... a distributed version
control system would fit for this use case way better ... i don't want
to start a scm flamewar, but for me svn appears to be very limited
compared to tools like git ...
-- tim_at_[hidden] http://tim.klingt.org Who need fossil fuel when the sun ain't goin' nowhere Amiri Baraka
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk