Joel de Guzman wrote: >> Sure, it would work. But my suggestion has the benefit of allowing >> for the individual files to stand alone. Not a big benefit I know >> :-) And of setting some of the other info. Like having a place to >> put the license and copyright since I noticed that people don't seem >> to currently put those in comments of such included qbk files. > > Right. Looking at it again, I think we only need to allow a couple of > the items there to be *overridden* in included files. Example: > > * copyright (a) or (b) > * authors (a) or (b) > * license (a) or (b) > * last-revision (a), if it's more recent than current value > > where: > > a) Merge with the current value. > b) Use new value only for current file/doc. > > I took out all the ones you have as (c) -- Ignore the new value. > I also took out source-mode since this can already be overridden. > > So, these overrides can be placed anywhere. Example: > > main.qbk > > [library foo > [quickbook 1.4] > [version 1.4] > [copyright 2006 Joe Bloke] > [authors [Bloke, Joe]] > [purpose Whatever...] > [license > Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. > (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at > [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt]) > ] > [last-revision $Date: 2006/09/16 09:21:08 $] > ] > > include.qbk > > [license > Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. > (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at > [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt]) > ] > > [last-revision $Date: 2006/09/16 09:21:08 $] > > How does that sound?
I like the way this is going, but I would actually prune the list of overrides a little more: [last-revision...] Definitely needed, as per my original post :-) [quickbook....] Also needed so that individual includes can start using new features without having to go through and fix errors in the whole doc. [version...] Not sure about this one, shouldn't a library have a single version number? [copywrite...][authors...] These would be useful to have: especially for "meta-libraries" like Boost.Math which has many sub-components by different authors. The ideal world senario - probably not possible (!) - would be to merge all the author names onto the main front page, but for sections just to include the authors who worked on that section. Does that make sence? [purpose...] Isn't this used just once on the main page, or maybe the index of libraries? I don't see any great advantage to having more than one such block. [license...] Given that everything should be under the same license (as far as Boost is concerned anyway), having more than one such block just complicates things. HTH, John. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
