Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] spirit classic modularization
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-05-22 17:01:08

on Mon May 21 2012, Joel de Guzman <> wrote:

> 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.

There's a way, but I don't think I want to take responsibility for doing
that job. If you want that, I'm afraid you'll have to do it yourself.

> 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?)

Authors will be able to grant and revoke write privileges on each of the
repositories for which they are responsible.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

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