RFC: replacing MacroLogFeature.cmake with FeatureSummary.cmake

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Thursday 14 July 2011, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On Thursday 14 July 2011 03:42:01 Michael Jansen wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 July 2011 10:49:50 Ian Wadham wrote:
> > > On 14/07/2011, at 5:16 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > What do you think of this ?
> > > > More wishes ?
> > > > Should it do it in a different way ?
> > > 
> > > Very nice.  I especially like the PURPOSE concept.
> > > 
> > > As we discussed before, in connection with use of OpenAL sound
> > > in some games, could it be possible to have grades of requirement
> > > in between REQUIRED and OPTIONAL?  They would not bomb out
> > > the cmake run, but should issue some stronger message that the
> > > requirement was not met than just saying it was "optional".
> > 
> > I would suggest RECOMMENDED. Like it works without but we think its
> > really less useful then.
> > 
> > OPTIONAL would be stuff then that enabled additional functionality that
> > is not really needed for all of us. like something that add iphone
> > support. not everyone has one.
> 
> Several packaging systems has 3 levels of relations.
> stuff that must be there.
>      RPM-language: Requires. Deb-language: Depends.
> 
> optional stuff that should be there by default on normal systems
>      RPM-language: Recommends. Deb-language: Recommends
> 
> Optional stuff that gives something extra
>      RPM-language: Suggests. Deb-language: Suggests.
> 
> Maybe we could be inspired by that?
> 
> Note that on debian systems, apt and aptitude installs Depends and
> Recommends by default, and allows Recommends to be removed without
> removing other package.
> Yum don't know about Recommends nor Suggests and just installs Required
> packages.

Thanks for the feedback :-)
So, levels would be:
* REQUIRED
* RECOMMENDED
* OPTIONAL

Should the output be

Missing REQUIRED packages:
* A
* B
* C

Missing RECOMMENDED packages:
* E
* F
* G

or would 

Missing packages:
* A (REQUIRED)
* B (REQUIRED)
* C (REQUIRED)
* E (RECOMMENDED)
* F (RECOMMENDED)
* G (RECOMMENDED)

be also ok ?
I guess the first option is easier to read (for humans), while the second 
would be easier to parse (for a program).

Now, anybody feels like giving this a shot ?
I'm maintaining that file currently in cmake, so I can simply commit/push it, 
and I'd happily hand maintainership over :-)

Alex