[IGSTK-Developers] Sandbox decoupling

[Julien Jomier]

I agree too.
If we can just comment out the mechanism instead of deleting it that 
might be useful in case we need it in the future.

Julien

Andinet Enquobahrie wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> 
> I agree with you 100%.
> 
> -Andinet
> 
>>
>> Now that we are wrapping up the main developing effort,
>> it seems to be a good time for decoupling the Sandbox
>> from the main IGSTK library.
>>
>> We are still using the system that merges IGSTK into
>> the Sandbox and test everything combined as if the
>> Sandbox were absorbing all the code.
>>
>> This approach was used during the period we were refactoring
>> IGSTK classes and brought them to the Sandbox in order to
>> accelerate the process.
>>
>> The same model doesn't seem to be maintainable for the next
>> stage of the toolkit, which is probably a smoother and more
>> incremental evolution of the classes.
>>
>> We could remove the mechanism that copies all the files from
>> the main library into a sandbox directory, and simply build
>> the Sandbox as a external project based on IGSTK. In this
>> more normal scenario there will be no duplication of code
>> between the main IGSTK and the Sandbox.
>>
>>
>> Please let us know if you see any drawback in proceeding
>> with this clean up.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>
>>   Thanks
>>
>>
>>      Luis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> IGSTK-Developers mailing list
>> IGSTK-Developers at public.kitware.com
>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/igstk-developers
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IGSTK-Developers mailing list
> IGSTK-Developers at public.kitware.com
> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/igstk-developers
>