On Dec 17, 2007 1:22 PM, Gonzalo Garramuño <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Additional components like cpack or ctest are a plus, but they are not > a major reason for sticking with cmake.
They aren't *yet*. They certainly could be in the future. I lost the Chicken Scheme project to a bunch of Linux Autoconf packagers. Ease of Linux packaging was perceived as more important than MSVC support and the complications of CMake. Where "complications" means "having to lift a finger to learn how CMake works." The point is, packaging technologies introduced a choice, a fork in the road for people to take. Since the Chicken Scheme community is almost entirely a bunch of Unix-heads, they chose to stick with Unix-oriented stuff. To the point of jettisoning all "complicated" build systems and going back to hand-rolled Makefiles. They completely dumped MSVC. So, my perspective is that packaging technologies definitely matter. I'm glad that CMake is working on that. I also learned that it's not enough for project leads to be interested in CMake. They have to be fully committed to cross-platform development, and looking for the best solution to that problem. Otherwise, you give them a great build system, and they'll balk the minute they have to lift a finger to maintain it. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake