Hi Matthew,
The problem is not that you have to learn cmake. You've shown your
competence with autotools and so it should not take you long at all.
The problem is that somewhere between 20 and 100 people on the team have
to learn either autotools or cmake well enough to make continuing
changes to the build system. And I looked at autotools and decided that
basing their further work on it, and forcing them all up a learning
curve so steep was not realistic compared to getting the 5 people
maximum that are competent in autotools to use cmake. We'd been talking
about this for at least a year, so I was really happy when Richard came
along and actually did the work.
I hope you'd admit that the esthetic choices in autotools and even make
are not the ones we'd make today. It ended up being a balance of least
ugly, most functional, largest community.
Thanks
Bruce
On 6/13/2013 6:42 AM, Matthew wrote:
> So basically anyone that has extensive knowledge of how Autotools work and
> have been able to work with the system just fine should be forced to learn a
> whole new set of tools so they can continue working with this? Doesn't sound
> fair to me for some odd reason. And yes, I know enough about them (Autotools)
> to do things that can be done with cmake; now, whether those things can all
> be done natively or not is something I will leave to other developers to talk
> about.
>
> Matthew Pitts
> N8OHU
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
