<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Conrad Parker <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:conrad@metadecks.org">conrad@metadecks.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
(I wish this project was in git so I could just reply to the patch inline ;-)<br>
<br>
Regarding this comment in the docs:<br>
<br>
+For brevity, the example package<br>
+does not include a library or any normal executables, but a real package would<br>
+be required to have at least one library or executable.<br>
<br>
is there a technical reason for requiring that the package contain<br>
some other library or executable? It seems like it would be useful to<br>
allow benchmark-only packages that eg. provide a benchmark of some<br>
task that ties together two other library packages (st. the benchmark<br>
wouldn't naturally fit into either of those packages), or shootout<br>
submissions etc.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>It made sense when executables and libraries where the only possible sections, but it might not make sense anymore.</div><div><br></div><div>Duncan, is this a technical or policy restriction?</div>
<div><br></div><div>-- Johan</div><div><br></div></div>