[vtk-developers] VTK Modular Directory Structure

Bill Lorensen bill.lorensen at gmail.com
Mon Mar 19 19:23:37 EDT 2012

True. No problem. I just wanted to see the thinking behind the differences.

Current structure looks good to me.


On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Brad King <brad.king at kitware.com> wrote:
> On 3/19/2012 4:51 PM, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Bill Lorensen<bill.lorensen at gmail.com>
>>  wrote:
>>> But, at the top level, why not keep all of the modules under a Modules
>>> directory like we do in ITK. This unclutters the top level directory
>>> and makes it clear which directories are part of the modularization.
>> We discussed this at length when the process began, and decided on two
>> levels. I know you asked about this last year when ITK was still using
>> ITK/ITK/module/leveltwo, and we didn't intend to use it back then. I
>> personally disagree that having a container directory unclutters
>> things, and was never involved in the ITK decision to require such a
>> container directory.
> Note that ITK always had a container directory.  It was called "Code"
> prior to modularization.  VTK never had one.
> -Brad

Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com

More information about the vtk-developers mailing list