Brad King wrote: > On 2/19/2012 10:54 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: >> I don't see a problem with needing an additional keyword. >> >> find_package(Qt5) >> vs. >> find_package(Qt5 CONFIG_MODE) > > Remember we decided on > > find_package(Qt5 CONFIG) > > instead which reads better. > > I'm not opposed outright to this syntax in the future. However, I > think the policy as proposed is too aggressive for transition. It > will create a warning on every config-mode find_package call that > exists in any project release to date. This penalizes everyone who > was proactive enough to have read, understood, and used the more > powerful config-mode. The warning will remain in all the old releases > of their projects forever and make it look like they did something > wrong. Furthermore, to avoid the warning in new versions they will > have to add extra decoration to their calls, and during the transition > period that decoration will be spelled NO_MODULE which is pretty ugly > when not in a Find module.
The discussion on the KDE buildsystem list to addresses some deeper frustrations with the way CMake finds packages, including modifying the cache through CMake-gui where to find things in the case that Find modules are used: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.devel.buildsystem/7065/focus=7124 Could be useful for your consideration. Thanks, Steve. -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers