[geom] privatize bvh headers that are only used by cxx files and mv to builtins folder - #23397
ferdymercury wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
|
@sawenzel Note this update/change. |
It was only very minorly modified for ROOT
Test Results 23 files 23 suites 3d 22h 18m 41s ⏱️ Results for commit de8f78b. ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
This is not ideal. I am accessing these headers elsewhere in O2. |
One question, why not having bvh as a full library ? Note that this is problematic for future Debian packaging, we are moving away from having external software copy-pasted into ROOT, especially if it has licenses differing from that of ROOT. I checked the upstram bvh repo, and it installs both headers and CMake targets: So the idea would be to do in ROOT: Then, in O2 you could do the same:
The goal is to rely less on ROOT to serve as package manager and rely more on the OS package manager, that is safer in general since it gets automatic security updates, etc. So if bvh gets added to Debian/Fedora/homebrew, that would be less of an issue. Alternatively, you could add at the beginning of the O2 software a Or |
|
It is just the way it is at the moment. It can be changed. You may proceed. |
agheata
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK from my side, the intention was not to expose them, and it is not a native ROOT package (e.g. it is not persisted out of the box). LGTM!
|
Thanks for these changes. Indeed bvh looks indeed like a posterchild for becoming a builtin, maybe initially vendored, then treated as potential system package if the usual requirements are met (mainly installability through apt, dnf and brew) |
This Pull request:
Changes or fixes:
They were probably accidentally installed, since they were in the inc/ folder but never listed in the CMakeLists.txt
Never documented, so hard that someone was relying on those
Also move BVH to builtins folder and add missing MIT license file. fyi @ellert (potential for unbundling)