I like 3rdparty, and definitely helps newcomers too. As long as it's kept relatively clean and up-to-date of course (not sure if that's a case for or against however!). :)
On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 at 19:25 Chris Olivier <[email protected]> wrote: > I support putting gtest in 3rdparty as well. That being said, which of > these should we be storing in the Apache repository and which do we pull > from their source repositories. What’s standard practice in this case for > Apache projects? > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:54 PM Pedro Larroy <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > We could also add gtest as well for example. > > > > > > > > I would like to point out that is quite cumbersome to get your code > > tested and ready before sending a PR, this includes installing > > cpplint, pylint, gtest… > > > > Installing gtest and bootstrapping it is not completely trivial. > > > > > > > > Kind regards. > > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Eric Xie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm fine with a 3rdparty folder. Not sure about apache legal. > > > > > > On 2017-11-17 10:25, Chris Olivier <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> All, > > >> > > >> I often find it desirable to have a method for 3rdparty packages to be > > >> included (possibly optionally) in a 3rdparty directory. We do this > > with > > >> 'cub' to some degree, but it's in the root and is actually a fork in > the > > >> dmlc repository. Some samples of what might go in there: > > >> > > >> 1) Intel OpenMP (llvm-openmp) -- In order to use Intel OMP by default > > >> 2) gperftools -- In order to build statically with -fPIC, which isn't > > the > > >> case with the general distribution > > >> 3) mkl-dnn -- In order to build and have debug information available > for > > >> mkl-dnn (and possibly submit bugfixes) > > >> > > >> What do you all think? > > >> > > >> -Chris > > >> > > >
