[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Object-Archiv

From: Alexander Malmberg
Subject: Re: Object-Archiv
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 21:50:33 +0200

Ian Mondragon wrote:
> Here's what I was picturing with this repository:

This sounds a lot like what I want as well.

> 1. sanely ordered collection, organized in categories

Sanely, but not pedantically. :)

> 2. headerdoc/gsdoc comments throughout

Comments are nice, but I don't want to require them. IMHO, uncommented
code is better than no code.

> 3. add tags to the comments that we could use specifically for
> repository purposes, i.e. "author", "maintainer", "url", "description",
> etc. ala python distutils package tags

Tags are important, but mostly to make 1. possible.

> 4. some sort of bsd ports-style access to the classes

I'd be happy just being able to download them from some page, but this
is a neat idea.

> in order to resolve the packaging dispute, perhaps we could create a
> mechanism to allow users to actually create a custom library from only
> the files that they check out?  what i mean is that if i want the
> Snazzy, Spam and OhMyGodYouAreUgly classes, i could pull them down by
> specifying a name for the library, and a GNUmakefile would also be
> dynamically created and pulled down with the code, specifying only
> those files i'm grabbing along with the other pertinent information.

I don't think this is worthwhile. The only real advantage I see with a
library is that it would avoid code duplication of compiled code (the
library could be shared among many apps/tools that use it). If each
library is customized, it won't be shared, so you might as well save
yourself a bunch of trouble and just include the .m files in your

- Alexander Malmberg

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]