On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 22:37 -0800, Tony Kelman wrote: > > Given our past experience[1][2] in working with upstream, anyone who > > maintains a working cmake is going to have to carry patches long-term, > > if not permanently. > > > > [1] http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=10122 > > [2] http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2010-October/040353.html and > > thread > > Yes, those took a while, but they were resolved eventually.
With far too much time and effort expended, something I'm not eager to repeat. > > All these patches are the result of years of real-world usage of cmake, > > and there will likely be more patches required in the future. I can't > > tell you off the top of my head which packages require each of these > > changes, but I can tell you why they are necessary (and a few of them > > should be quite obvious). > > That would help. Someone else is welcome to maintain the package without > asking any questions, but if I'm going to do it I'd like to know what > those patches are for. I have your git history, but your commit messages > are not particularly enlightening. I'm asking for failure cases, links > to bug reports or previous postings, or similar. I don't think that's an > unreasonable request, is it? I'll put the patches back and rebuild, but > I'd like to understand them first. As I said, I can't tell you any more which packages failed without these packages. Half of the patches should be obvious. Do you have any specific questions? -- Yaakov