my little tooth on cmake

[Cristian Tibirna]

On 17 March 2006 10:17, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > I find it a very good thing that we move away from auto* (these always
> > scared me white) but we will need to put our collective heads into an
> > acceptable solution for this level of indirection problem. Precompiled
> > binaries for most common platforms, copy in our cvs... _I_ don't know,
> > but _we_ will have to.
>
> I am not sure to understand your point.
>
> Do you mean now (and in short-term), as for a few features cmake CVS is
> needed or do you mean on long-term?
>
> However on long-term, is cmake.org not supposed to have source and/or
> binary packages?

Well, exactly. What kills the horse is the uncertainty. Build tools we use(d) 
'till recently are a mainstay with all things Unix since at least 30 years. 
While scripting based tools can just be distributed with the app./lib. 
packages. With things like cmake, air gets fuzzy. 

And here is where I said that, given the important advantages of cmake and our 
will to have it in, we need to make sure we have a plan! (and it's why this 
discussion goes to core-devel, as this is a task for all of us). Be it that 
we twist both arms of the few major kde-loving distros out there to include 
it. Or provide an _extremely easy_ path towards the new config/building tools 
so that we sweeten the sourly steep hoop they freshly introduce. Or ... 

Just food for thought.

Thanks again.

-- 
Cristian Tibirna
KDE developer .. tibirna at kde.org .. http://www.kde.org