[opensource-dev] Is 'STANDALONE' confusing?
Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
oz at lindenlab.com
Wed Feb 23 03:29:57 PST 2011
On 2011-02-23 4:57, leliel wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)
> <oz at lindenlab.com> wrote:
>> 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
> In other words the viewer is normally built as a standalone
> application, i.e. the STANDALONE option does the exact opposite of
> what you'd expect given the definition of the word. So why not just
> invert the meaning of STANDALONE?
No, I certainly don't want to do that (however much sense it might have
made to do it that way in the first place), because the transition would
be too confusing. Besides, we're talking about what happens when you're
building, not about what happens when the viewer is run by a user.
More information about the opensource-dev