[Insight-developers] ITKv4 Modularization Plan

[Bill Lorensen]

Steve,

I think the intent is to have a few "packages", not 80. For
developers, they will be able to get "itk complete" or whatever it
will be called. Packaging and Modularization are two different things.
I believe that the new modularization will enable more flexible
packaging.

My take on modularization is that it will help application developers
select the pieces of itk that they want to use in their apps.

Bill

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Steve M. Robbins <steve at sumost.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:45:50PM -0500, Brad King wrote:
>
>> >>On 02/08/2011 04:37 PM, Bill Lorensen wrote:
>> > I'm not concerned, at this point, about a flat layout. I'm concerned
>> > about the naming conventions.
>>
>> The module names are later to match distro package names.  I don't
>> see a single debian package in the default distribution with any
>> upper-case letters in its name.
>
> Is the intention that each module becomes a separate package?
>
> Gaetan later posted there are something like 75 modules.  I can't say
> I'm enthused (as the Debian packager) at creating 75 packages of ITK.
>
> By the way, I also maintain the Boost packages for Debian.  Each boost
> shared library (about 17 of them) produces two packages -- one with
> the shared library and one with the static library and link library.
> There are also a few doc and miscellaneous packages bringing the total
> to 38 (and growing with each release of boost) which is way too many
> to manage.
>
> I'm more likely to create ONE development package (containing all the
> headers) and a handful (3-4) of library packages, each containing a
> cohesive set of shared libraries.
>
> Cheers,
> -Steve
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFNYBja0i2bPSHbMcURAmElAJwPtQoxRDglcOjBnyPmqOxmOZ+F4gCfRcdY
> prMtWPYUo0waaqhi374CAgw=
> =mz7q
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>