Re: [boost] date_time -> serialization (Was: spirtit -> serialization)

Subject: Re: [boost] date_time -> serialization (Was: spirtit -> serialization)
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-06-16 04:28:59

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Vicente J.
Botet
> Escriba
> Sent: 15 June 2014 22:42
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] date_time -> serialization (Was: spirtit ->
serialization)
> 
> Le 15/06/14 17:16, Paul A. Bristow a écrit :
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Peter
> >> Dimov
> >> Sent: 15 June 2014 12:46
> >> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> >> Subject: [boost] date_time -> serialization (Was: spirtit ->
> >> serialization)
> > If someone is using Serialisation then isn't there a very high
> > probability that they are also using DateTime?
> >
> > So having these in the same package doesn't really matter (except for
> > the artificial level number)?
> >
> > Looking at the shrink-wrap users, I have a suspicion that this applies
> > quite widely - many people will manage to pull in a big chunk of Boost.
> >
> > Rearranging the modules isn't going to change this much.
> >
> > Sub-sub-modules sound Very Evil to me.
> Why?

Gut feel ;-)

> > KISS applies?
> >
> KISS <=> without cycles

OK - I can accept this as a goal.

But we need to get a release out...

Yours Worryingly

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal UK LA8 8AB
[phone]