Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] spirit classic modularization
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-21 19:07:25

On 5/22/2012 12:40 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> While I was in Aspen I split Spirit and Spirit Classic into separate
> Git repositories:
> The manifest entries begin here, and as you can see, are quite
> long for these two libraries:
> This is mostly due to the limited expressivity of the manifest language,
> but regardless...
> The question, for Spirit developers: which arrangement is better?
> Should both spirits go back into a single repository?

At this point, I think I would prefer the new arrangement. I'd like
that especially if there's a way for the build system (CMake?) to
copy/forward the original headers back into it's former place for
backward compatibility. I'd also take this opportunity to clean up
some include cruft there. I can do that once we get write access.

(BTW: will authors have the privilege to issue and revoke write
access to its contributors limited to its module boundaries?)


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at