Hello, Is anyone thinking about storing library metadata in modules? I'm thinking about this in context of the data required for the website, it'd be nice to automatically pull that from the library modules rather than having to maintain it myself, but I guess this might be something that others are thinking about (e.g. for the expected test failures, the library maintainer). So I was wondering if anyone has any plans? For anyone who isn't aware of it, the website data is stored in an xml file at: http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/website/public_html/live/doc/libraries.xml Of course, it could be desirable to store modularized metadata in a different format. Daniel
On 04/06/13 20:53, Daniel James wrote:
Hello,
Is anyone thinking about storing library metadata in modules? I'm thinking about this in context of the data required for the website, it'd be nice to automatically pull that from the library modules rather than having to maintain it myself, but I guess this might be something that others are thinking about (e.g. for the expected test failures, the library maintainer). So I was wondering if anyone has any plans?
For anyone who isn't aware of it, the website data is stored in an xml file at:
http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/website/public_html/live/doc/libraries.xml
Of course, it could be desirable to store modularized metadata in a different format.
I think it's a great idea. But in a modularized setup, where would the category definitions go?
On 4 June 2013 19:57, Mathias Gaunard
I think it's a great idea. But in a modularized setup, where would the category definitions go?
I'm not sure. Maybe in the super module, or perhaps a separate repo which could also contain things like helper scripts and the library template that was proposed elsewhere (i.e. things for developers that won't be included in the release). I haven't really thought it through yet. I just want to make sure I'm not going to step on anyone's toes, and that anything I do is compatible with other efforts.
On 4 Jun 2013 20:07, "Daniel James"
On 4 June 2013 19:57, Mathias Gaunard
wrote:
I think it's a great idea. But in a modularized setup, where would the category definitions go?
I'm not sure. Maybe in the super module, or perhaps a separate repo which could also contain things like helper scripts and the library template that was proposed elsewhere (i.e. things for developers that won't be included in the release).
I haven't really thought it through yet. I just want to make sure I'm not going to step on anyone's toes, and that anything I do is compatible with other efforts.
You will probably want to look at git notes for the expected failures markup. That way you'll get a history of how the expected failures have changed over time with the advantage you can retrospectively alter the markup for a commit without modifying the published sha.
On 4 June 2013 20:18, James Sharpe
You will probably want to look at git notes for the expected failures markup. That way you'll get a history of how the expected failures have changed over time with the advantage you can retrospectively alter the markup for a commit without modifying the published sha.
I'm not going to be doing anything with the testing system myself, but that's an interesting idea. Does anyone have any experience with how they work in practise? I was only vaguely aware of them, and searching for the web I mainly found notes on git. I did see that Gerrit uses them (although I expect we'll use github for code reviews?), and there's a Jenkins plugin to use them to record test results, so there must be some real world experience.
participants (3)
-
Daniel James -
James Sharpe -
Mathias Gaunard