Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature flags vs different crates, and others #29

Closed
norman784 opened this issue Jan 17, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Feature flags vs different crates, and others #29

norman784 opened this issue Jan 17, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@norman784
Copy link
Owner

I'm trying to figure out what's the easiest way for the user to use the library, if we use a monolithic library we need to set feature flags, but they can become quickly a mess, while in the other hand we can have different crates gaiku-baker-voxel, gaiku_file_gox, etc so will be cleaner what are you using, but you will end up having a lot of small crates.

In both cases the idea is to reduce the sub dependencies used by the final user, by only including what they really need, for gaiku-common will be no option but use feature flags, but maybe we can move the Texture, Chunk and Mesh implementations into another crate gaiku-common-impls (?)

Also other issue, is better to use underscores instead of dash, for the sake of consistency when declaring the deps in the Cargo.toml and importing them?

@norman784 norman784 added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 17, 2021
@norman784
Copy link
Owner Author

I think to solve our issue (#23 (comment)) we need to run the test for each folder independently, and I would like to move the crates to a crate folder, but for that to happen we need to close/merge all PR's first.

@norman784
Copy link
Owner Author

Closing this, discussion can continue here #35.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant