Re: traverse-dependencies and include-type

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-04 08:28:49

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> On Friday 31 December 2004 21:57, David Abrahams wrote:
>> The docs show this example:
>>
>> stage dist : hello
>>
>> : <traverse-dependencies>on <include-type>EXE
>>
>> <include-type>LIB
>> ;
>>
>> I dislike the names being used here. “include” already has a different
>> meaning, and “traverse” is just vague -- it isn't clear what happens
>> when those dependencies are traversed. You could replace both names
>> with “install” and it would be an improvement.
> 
> You mean:
> 
> <install-dependencies> and <install-type>
> 
> ? That's an improvement, indeed. Will do when I'm back from holiday.
> 
> BTW, what about "stage"? If we're to clarify the user interface, maybe we 
> should have "install" rule, not "stage"?

I tend to agree.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com