You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Clear separation of standard specification and implementation #864
Build scripts/Python bindings and code examples (e.g. trace tools) should be separated out into a separate repository
Language-specific bindings/code should be separated as well (e.g. separate Python and C++ repositories to build OSI for Python or C++)
Only proto definitions and documentation (and CI workflow stuff) should remain in the core standard repository
Backwards compatibility concerns
Changes in build processes don't affect the actual definition of the standard. This has been done multiple times in the past without breaking backwards compatibility.
Advantages
Independent releases/versioning: Changes in build processes or accompanying code do not affect the release of the standard (and do not require a release of the standard)
Independent deployment (e.g. retrospective deployment of old versions on PyPi)
(As discussed in P_2025_02-008/P_2025_02-009 meeting 2025-04-29)
changed the title [-]Repository re-organization and refactoring the build scripts into a separate repo from the core repo[/-][+]Clear separation of standard specification and implementation[/+]on Apr 30, 2025
Activity
[-]Repository re-organization and refactoring the build scripts into a separate repo from the core repo[/-][+]Clear separation of standard specification and implementation[/+]asadekasam commentedon May 6, 2025
First suggestion of re-organization