P1689 Format for describing dependencies of source files

[wg21bot]

P1689R0 Format for describing dependencies of source files (Ben Boeckel, Brad King)

[tahonermann]

SG16 2019-07 review in Cologne

No polls taken. The author was present. The intent of SG16 review was to evaluate the approach taken for handling file names.

Dropping the SG16 label.

[brycelelbach]

Cologne 2019-07 SG15 Minutes

P1689R0 Dependency Metadata Format

Champion: Ben Boeckel

Minute Taker: Nathan Burgers

Start Overview: 07-19 9:57

Start Review: 10:10

Start Polling: 10:12

POLL: Remove the top-level "extensions" key.

NO OBJECTION TO UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

Attendance: 20

POLL: Require a vendor string at the start of extensions.

Strongly For	Weakly For	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
4	7	5	1	0

Attendance: 20

That has consensus.

Break: 10:17

Resume: 10:40

Percent encoding vs unicode escaping.

Names to bikeshed:

• "logical" -> "logical-name"
• "readable" -> "readable-path"
• "data" -> "code-units" (SG16 should decide)
• "provides" (this is probably fine)
• "requires" (this is probably fine)

Start Polling: 11:12

POLL: Remove percent encoding for filepaths.

Strongly For	Weakly For	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
0	8	6	1	0

Attendance: 17

A: I think it's useful.

That has consensus.

POLL: Remove "future-link".

Strongly For	Weakly For	Neutral	Weakly Against	Strongly Against
1	5	8	0	0

Attendance: 17

That has consensus.

End: 11:23

CONSENSUS: Bring a revision of P1689R0, with the guidance below, to SG15 for further review.

• Remove the top-level "extensions" key.
• Require a vendor string at the start of extensions.
• Remove percent encoding for filepaths.
• Remove "future-link".
• Produce bikeshedding options for "logical", "readable", "data", "provides", and "requires".
• Produce "wording".

[wg21bot]

P1689R1 Format for describing dependencies of source files (Ben Boeckel, Brad King)

[wg21bot]

P1689R2 Format for describing dependencies of source files (Ben Boeckel, Brad King)