On Tuesday, December 13, 2011, Tom Hacohen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13/12/11 11:51, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: >> >> If we have cmake in parallel and it works, what >> are the chances we get it as the official? > > I think you first need to prove people why we want to move. What are the advantages? disadvantages? Why would we care? and etc... Then, after convincing everyone, it should be a lot easier.
Cmake is a single simple language that generates native build infra. That alone justifies the change. Autofoo is m4 that I know, but very few people know about. Then there is shell, make and automate extensions. Cmake is very simple and flexible, using it with webkit was a hard enough test. It is very big (bigger than libefl will be), it's full of toggles and options, nowadays it's shared by multiple ports (blackberry's rim, clutter and EFL). I'm working with Autofoo with 10+ years and I was somehow new to webkit and completely new to cmake, I wrote the biggest part of build in 1 day, with help we managed to finish it in less than one week. It will also generate visual studio and Xcode to help other systems, will optionally present config options in nice user interfaces (ncurses or qt), will show percentage on builds, etc. it's is less stupid wrt basic tests, then it configures immediately and not takes minutes like autogen/configure And it does fine for cross compile, as being show by qt/kde people, webkit and others. Is that enough? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Systems Optimization Self Assessment Improve efficiency and utilization of IT resources. Drive out cost and improve service delivery. Take 5 minutes to use this Systems Optimization Self Assessment. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51450054/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
