On 09/01/2014 04:55 PM, Rene Rivera wrote: > On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote: > >> On 09/01/2014 11:01 AM, Andrey Semashev wrote: >> >>> On Monday 01 September 2014 08:46:53 Vladimir Prus wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On the other hand, was this directory structure ever explicitly >>>> discussed on >>>> this list, and agreed to? It seems to basically put two libraries inside >>>> one git repository - which is not arrangement done before? >>>> >>> >>> I asked about MPL recently in this thread: >>> >>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/253920 >>> >>> There were a few more general threads about sublibs in the recent past: >>> >>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/252054 >>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/236737 >>> >>> So the ability to create sublibs seems to be the common knowledge, and >>> everyone decides whether to use it or not for their benefit. I'm not sure >>> there was an official announcement from Boost.Build team or the Steering >>> Committee though. >>> >> >> Thanks for the explanation - it appears there's enough support for this >> idea; I've added these links to commit message of your patch and merged >> to develop. >> > > I, and others, have expressed dislike for that structure.. > > http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2014/06/213998.php > > So it would be nice if we stopped using it. I think that decision would have to be made by SC. What apparently is happening is that everything-is-repo approach to modularization has proved rather inconvenient, and people are not thrilled about splitting libraries such as Boost.MPL into further git repositories. Arguments can be made both ways; for the time being it seems that generic code in Jamroot is better than special treatment for numeric. - Volodya _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost