> Is it because:
> - People are comfortable with autotool and don't understand cmake?
> - The cmake build doesn't work as well as the autotools build? (I've
> fixed everything that I've gotten test reports for, which have been
> few)
> - Some other reason I haven't described here?

>From my side it's just available time.   I have about three Codec
2/FreeDV projects going right now.  I'm adding real functionality and
pushing the project forward. The build tools I am using work.  As I'm in
the middle of adding functionality and debugging I don't have the time
or inclination to move my development work to cmake today.

However I agree it's a good idea to standardise on build systems.  I'll
get there some time, and I am sure we can standardise on one build
system.  So I am just suggesting we wait a little longer before
mandating cmake.

In the mean time what would really help me is the community (Richard and
testers) working to make sure the cmake build for FreeDV works across
different Linuxes/Win32/Mac.  When I say "works" I mean (i) the build
procedure is simple and documented so anyone can follow it and it works
every time (ii) it builds from one command line command (iii) every
feature has been tested on air - just successfully compiling is not
enough. 

- David



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Freetel-codec2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2

Reply via email to