Re: [boost] ATTENTION: Library requirements..

Subject: Re: [boost] ATTENTION: Library requirements..
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-01-08 11:05:44

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 1/7/16 10:21 AM, Rene Rivera wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> A few observations
>>>
>>>
>> [cut]
>>
>> Still allowed. But.. I, as in personally, reorganize that to remove the
>> extra top dirs :-)
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> /util
>>      * Move to /build/util
>> /performance
>>      * Move to /test/performance
>> /CMake
>>      * Move to /build/cmake
>> /doc/boostbook
>>      * Rename to /doc/src
>>
>> But that's all just my personal preference.
>>
>
> Hmmm- I took pains to be sure that I didn't conflict with any of
> your stuff.  That's why I didn't want to put anything into your
> directories.  I still think that's a good idea.
>

OK.. Your choice :-)

doc/src ... Hmmm - some people use markdown, etc.
>

Good point. But people are unlikely to use multiple types of sources at
once. And generally the file extensions give you the types. So I still
prefer a single "src" dir. Or in my case no src dir. But maybe I should
change that for consistency.

It's unclear to me whether you're going to specify that it
> be a requirement that there be a bjam file if and only
> if boost book is used.

I think I was clear in saying that "if the library needs to build
documentation" it must have a jamfile.

>   Or maybe you want to try
> to require that every doc/src include a jamfile
> to produce the html in accordance with the contents
> of doc/src.
>

I don't mean to say that.

Personally, I'm ok if you want to mandate doc/src and
> a jamfile if possible.  But I doubt it would be popular.

Right, which is why I'm mandating that ;-) And really, I just want to be
able to the process of the library collection to be automated. So I can,
selfishly, spend less time merging PRs and more time having fun with family
:-)

> Easier said than done I know.

I think that might as well be the moto for Boost! ;-)

As for the "[cut]" parts of your post.. I would suggest starting new
>> threads for specific subjects (license, javascript, etc.). As I was only
>> asking about the parts I changed in this. I.e. the structure/integration.
>>
>
> LOL - I just followed the link to the whole page.  I didn't know which
> parts you changed.

It's OK.. The ensuing discussions are interesting nonetheless. And perhaps
it's nudging people into rereading that document.

-- 
-- Rene Rivera
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail