[Capy review] On peer dependencies

I'd like to bring up the issue of peer dependencies in Boost, taking
Capy's review as an occasion. Running boostdep --brief capy yields:

# Primary dependencies
asio

# Secondary dependencies
align
assert
# and half of Boost, omitted for brevity

This is not a hard dependency - Asio is included in an optional header
(capy/buffers/asio.hpp) to facilitate integration. I think this is the
right choice, but we lack a way to represent this. Every Boost library
depending on Capy and using boostdep will now install Asio and half of
Boost (when they likely don't need it). I don't know if this has
implications for package managers or not (the b2 people probably know
the answer).

What's everyone's opinion on this? Should we try to do something to
represent the concept of "peer dependency"? (maybe a field in
meta.json?)

Best,
Ruben.
_______________________________________________
Boost mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman3/lists/boost.lists.boost.org/
Archived at: https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/M7AWICRLVUNE7HH2EVDSU6B7JXGPWI5H/