[opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?
Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
oz at lindenlab.com
Tue Feb 22 18:56:23 PST 2011
On 2011-02-21 9:38, Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> On 02/21/2011 03:28 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
>> > If we are going to change it, the replacement term should, in addition
>> > to being more accurately descriptive of what it does, be an affirmative
>> > term - don't suggest any 'NO_*" replacements.
> Would it be acceptable to invert the setting's semantic in order to
> avoid a negation? I.e., STANDALONE=OFF would become NEW_SETTING=ON and
> vice versa. That'd allow for easy-to-understand names like
> USE_PREBUILD_LIBS or DOWNLOAD_NEEDED_DEPENDENCIES.
> Off course, the default value should be inverted together with the
> setting's semantic, such that the default behavior does not change.
Yes, I think that's best (assuming that we're going to change anything).
A couple of comments on the interesting discussion....
I'm not sure that any variation on 'USE_PREBUILD' quite captures the
correct semantics, because in the new autobuild framework one way to
work is going to be to download the project for a library you want to
compile locally (perhaps to try a new version, or to make some patch)
and then modify your viewer builds to use the output of that
compilation. When you do that, you'll still be using exactly the same
sort of prebuilt package that you would, in the default case, download
The real distinction, I think, is whether or not you are using
_installed_ libraries. Normally, the viewer build has only minimal
reliance on the libs that are installed on the system itself - it puts
the packaged libraries (which are now by default all loaded in a
'build-*/packages directory rather than being mixed in with the sources).
That might suggest something like USE_PACKAGED_LIBS with a default value
More information about the opensource-dev