On Thursday 07 July 2005 18:09, Manu Abraham wrote: > Andrew de Quincey wrote: > > Well here is my opinion: > > > > Should we have "one library to rule them all", or split it into seperate > > sublibraries? Having seperate libraries is cleaner architecturally, but > > might be overkill... anyone have any really good arguments either way? > > Having sublibraries will keep confusion to an utmost maximum, I assume you mean minimum here :) > and will > be helpful in extending the same at a later stage in any aspect, if > required. IMHO this would be advantageous.. > > For example the main issue that i had initially to go with ca_zap from > scratch was based upon the same idea. Tomorrow is somebody needs to do > xyz, it should provide expandability for the same, rather than a tightly > integrated infrastructure. Yeah, makes sense to me.
