Subject: Re: [boost] Library metadata
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-24 18:14:25
On 24 February 2014 19:20, Eric Niebler <eniebler_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 02/23/2014 06:55 AM, Daniel James wrote:
>> This isn't the final format - I think the standards status fields
>> could do with an overhaul to support C++11 etc. You also don't need to
>> write the initial files yourself, I'll generate them and create pull
>> requests once this is settled.
>> Let me know what you think.
> For the ryppl project, a lot of thought was put into metadata. With Dave
> working at Apple now, I'm not sure whether ryppl is still "funct" (as
> opposed to defunct), but maybe you could ask on the ryppl-dev list for
> some guidance? It would suck if the formats/fields were incompatible. If
> nobody replies, then for sure do your own thing.
I find it very hard to care about Ryppl. I'm more concerned with what
we need to do now and what we've been doing for years than
compatibility with a format we may never use. If in the future the
metadata format needs to change, it shouldn't be a huge undertaking to
do that, it can be mostly automated. Compared to the other challenges
involved with ryppl it would be trivial. I'm not dealing with
dependencies or anything tricky.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk