On 02.11.2010, at 15:22, Albrecht Schlosser wrote: > Matt, what are your plans regarding maintenance of IDE files? > > Although I thought that it is generally not a good idea to > edit (fluid) source files to add new files/dependencies to > the IDE's, this turned out to be a way that more dev's can > manage the IDE files (e.g. I don't have these ancient MS IDE's, > but I could add a file to the old IDE by generating it with > fluid). Currently I have VC 2008 and VC 2010 installed (on my > Win 7 box, side by side), but I don't really like the idea to > manage the IDE project files with the IDE - but if only one > developer can manage them, this can be problematic... > > So, what would be the best way to manage the IDE files? Do > we keep the fluid IDE generation, or do you intend to remove > that again? Do we need to point-n-click each change in all > IDE project files? How did you do it with the recent 2008/2010 > files?
Well, it used to be a mess, and as nice as the idea of a GUI interface for updating all IDE's is, what I generated took longer than it took to get outdated. To code the IDE writers, I had to reverse-engineer the file formats and come up with a lot of kludges. Xcode for example has a very complex format, and minor releases every few months. Now a major release is coming up and who know how the format will change. I have come to the conclusion that it is probably easier to keep virtual machines with Xcode 3 and 4, VC9 and 10, and Linux (Makefile, cmake), and update them manually. All the other IDE's are based around gnu tools (Code::Blocks, etc.), so there is no need to generate an FLTK project file. Developers can simply do "make install", and then create new projects on their own that merely *use* FLTK. Now if I only understood CMake. That support still lacks. - Matthias _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
