Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Organization of the repo. #1

Open
ghost opened this issue Nov 18, 2013 · 12 comments
Open

Organization of the repo. #1

ghost opened this issue Nov 18, 2013 · 12 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Nov 18, 2013

So figured I would create a issue to discuss how we want to organize this library of dev tools. Just a place to post suggestions, ideas, questions or whatever you wish.

Anyways my question/suggestion is about a namespace. I assume this project is meant to be kind of a like a boost library that is made by the community at cplusplus.com. So basically a collections of functions, classes, or whatever that developers might find useful.

So I was thinking we should just have a single namespace to have everything under (IE like boost:: or std::). This is just a suggestion but if everyone else agrees with it was wondering what the name should be?

Also another question I had was are we just going to organize the code into folder for each category (IE Threading, Strings, Graphics, ect)? Or something else?

@ghost ghost assigned Lowest0ne Nov 18, 2013
@LB--
Copy link
Member

LB-- commented Nov 18, 2013

I was expecting this to be a collection of independent small executable tools, but I suppose small libraries could be included too. The idea is that the tools/libraries are small enough that it would not make sense for them to be in their own repo.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Nov 18, 2013

Opps sorry about that ;p. Thought this was going to a central "library" for all our code snippets. It probably would be best to just keep this repo for small executables only and I'll make another repo that can be for a central library like I was thinking.

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Nov 18, 2013
@ghost ghost reopened this Nov 18, 2013
@LB--
Copy link
Member

LB-- commented Nov 18, 2013

I made a repo for you to work with:
https://github.com/cpluspluscom/dev-snippets

@Lowest0ne
Copy link
Member

I was thinking it would be a place for independent executables. Maybe answers for questions that get asked thousands of times at cppreference. Maybe SFML ( or what-have-you ) starter code. I don't know. The spark for this was that I wrote a program to split the chess piece image, and figured anyone who wants to change the image will want to use that program ( instead of editing 12 images ).

I'm going to move that first project into a folder. My opinion would be to wait until the repo starts to get messy before heading towards any set origination.

@LB--
Copy link
Member

LB-- commented Nov 19, 2013

dev-snippets is for the beginner code that gets written over and over ;)

@Lowest0ne
Copy link
Member

Ah.

@Thumperrr
Copy link
Member

I think it would make sense to make these dev-tools open source. That is, include the source with the executable so users have the option of compiling it themselves (I'm assuming here that we don't all have the capability to compile a binary for every operating system our users might be using).
Independent executables are fine, except then I want one built for OS x whenever possible, which is hard to do without a mac.

@Thumperrr Thumperrr reopened this Nov 19, 2013
@Thumperrr
Copy link
Member

Woops, didn't mean to close the issue there.

@LB--
Copy link
Member

LB-- commented Nov 19, 2013

@Thumperrr: executables and other binaries are not allowed in this repository! So, there's no issue here :)

@Thumperrr
Copy link
Member

I was expecting this to be a collection of independent small executable tools

Maybe I misunderstood that? It looked like it implied that it would be the executables that were included, not the source. That works then.

@LB--
Copy link
Member

LB-- commented Nov 19, 2013

With GitHub, Git, or source control in general, it is implied that the repository will contain code and not binaries ;)

@Thumperrr
Copy link
Member

Which is why I was so confused when I thought you implied otherwise. It's all cleared up for me now!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants