On 12/09/10 21:16, Denis Arnaud wrote:
> 2010/9/12 Mateusz Loskot <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> 
>> The current directories layout was set by Maciej.
>> At that time, Maciej had presented rationale behind this structure.
> 
> Sorry, I did intend neither to be agressive nor to appear being
> revolutionary :)

Denis,

I haven't taken your comments that way :-)

> I understand that there has been historical reasons. I'm just giving you
> some feedback from a packager having looked at some other CMake-based
> software packages in Fedora/RedHat. That layout is easy to work with.
>
> It's just that it does not appear to be fully "CMake standard". But it
> does not matter that much.

I understand, but please keep in mind that there is nothing like
"CMake standard". I have exchanged a couple of e-mails with
Bill Hoffman and other CMake gurus and there is no unification.
There are some recommended best practices, though.

>> I admit, I'm more familiar with traditional layouts drawn along this:
>> <project-src>/include
>> <project-src>/src
>> <project-src>/doc
> 
>> As far as I understand Maciej's idea, package maintainers are
>> supposed to be interested exclusively in src/ directory.
>> Meaning, copy src/ content to soci-X.Y.Z or similar and make it src
>> package.
> 
> I remember having read Maciej stating that Soci maintainers should not
> bother of packaging at all...

We tend to be source providers. I think it's a good approach.
We are not a large team of developers, so it's better to not to get
distracted. Packaging is time consuming and of course packages
are a fantastic thing for users, so we greatly appreciated your and
others contributions in this field.

> So, your work on CMake building is already is big step forward :)

Good to hear.

> Note that packagers are interested in the documentation as well (and, of
> course, in the exported headers). As for the /include specific
> directory, it's not necessary, as long as there are CMake files in each
> sub-directory specificying what should be exported and/or installed.

Yes, indeed. Thus, a package maintainer is free to organise SOCI package
content as he likes or according to conventions ruled by
target system. All files are in SOCI tree. A package maintainer
can copy those files to different subtrees of package.

Shortly, layout of source tree does not have to be reflected in
layout of package at all.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
and start using them to simplify application deployment and
accelerate your shift to cloud computing
http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Soci-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users

Reply via email to