Subject: Re: [boost] [svn/git/hg] Support for modularization of Boost?
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-04 02:53:41
On 4/4/2012 3:20 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> As far as I can see, scaling Boost up to a much larger number of
>> libraries implies decentralization and decoupling, probably in the
>> form of per-library modules or something similar.
> 100 % aggree with this.
>> Modularization seems to have been missed in the discussions of
>> Subversion, Git, and Mercurial. Do distributed version control systems
>> in general and Git in particular have any important
>> advantages/disadvantages over svn for highly modularized projects?
> Hmmm - if boost is "modularized" - wouldn't that mean that
> each library has it's own repository. Or that each developer
> can decide where he want's to store his version?
I suggest starting modular SVN repositories -one for each library
+ core. Such decoupled/modular SVN repositories can immediately
be used with any DVCS such as Git/Hg. I'll also plead that each
modular library author be given the right to issue write access
to anyone within the confines of its repository. Also, I wouldn't
mind wherever the repository is actually hosted.
> I would think that the testing/deployment process could
> update/export each library from a different place without
> much problem.
That would be in the core.
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://boost-spirit.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk