Re: [boost] [Git] Moving beyond arm waving?

Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Moving beyond arm waving?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-07 20:57:09

At Mon, 07 Feb 2011 09:53:52 -0600,
Rene Rivera wrote:
> 
> > What about a library developer? What does the tree structure they work
> > with look like? How does integrate with their development repo? I
> > guess the non-version controlled tree produced by the above could be
> > used as a "complete (integrated) release tree", but I'd like to know
> > the specifics, and give them a try.
> 
> I would also like to know:
> 
> 1. How does that non-versioned complete integrated tree work as regards to
>    updates/pulls?

Today, you call GenHeaders explicitly, but if you check out Marcus' work you
don't have to.

> 2. What does it mean for testing? Specifically, complete incremental testing?

Nothing?  What, specifically, are you worried about?

> 3. Or is there no way to get a complete with source integrated tree? 

Please define "complete with source integrated tree" so I can answer that
question.

> I'm worried as not having an easy way to get that would make testing rather
> difficult.
> 
> Note, I dont' consider "use ryppl", or "use cmake", as an acceptable answer
> ;-) As being locked into any particular tool is something I'm vehemently
> against.

I don't think I'd give you an answer like that to any of these questions.  But
that said, being "locked in" somehow is unavoidable; we're locked into SVN now
aren't we?  We're certainly locked into C++ and Python and Boost.Build and
DocBook and BoostBook and QuickBook and... the list goes on.  Or do you mean
something distinct by "locked in?"

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