Distributing source that depends on boost
Author
This thread could probably more accuratly be called 'what are acceptable requirments for compiling an opensource project?'.
My project depends on boost. I do not want to redistribute the entire library, nor do I want to try and remove the pieces I'm using. Users will already have to add include and library paths to Visual Studio to compile it. Is it unreasonable to require someone to go get boost themselves, compile it, and set it up in Visual Studio themselves? Or should I just include the headers and libraries with my source?
I see nothing wrong with that. Including the specific files yourself just makes it difficult for users who already have boost installed.
Optionally providing copies of the specific files would be different, and perfectly acceptable [assuming Boost's licence doesn't prohibit it, of course]. They don't guarentee backwards compatability, so giving your users the specific version you use can simply things should a later version break your code.
CM
Optionally providing copies of the specific files would be different, and perfectly acceptable [assuming Boost's licence doesn't prohibit it, of course]. They don't guarentee backwards compatability, so giving your users the specific version you use can simply things should a later version break your code.
CM
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement