Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Modularization: did we get it right?
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-08 13:10:10
On 8 May 2012 12:44, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi All,
> As we head toward a modularized Boost, Daniel Pfeifer we on the Ryppl
> project would like confirmation that we've correctly (or at least
> sensibly, when there's no obvious "correct") identified the module
> boundaries in Boost's monolithic SVN repository. If library authors
> could take a few moments to examine the contents of your library's repo
> at https://github.com/boost-lib, and let us know, we'd be most grateful.
My bits looks fine, but if possible I'd like functional/hash to be a
separate module from functional (I think that's just everything from
the hash subdirectory, with the headers from
include/boost/functional/hash*). I guess it's tricky with the way
submodules are currently used.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk