Hi David and Alon, > My suggestion is that we first move those parts related to the Windows > TAP driver, Windows installer and easy-rsa into separate git trees. > Next, the Windows building scripts needs to be split up, so that there's > a separate building process for Windows TAP driver and the OpenVPN > binary. As those processes *are* different, it should actually simplify > the building process in the long run. Then we need to come up with a > better Windows installer process, which f.ex. can require a pre-compiled > TAP and OpenVPN binary. Makes perfect sense to me. There's little advantage in keeping these in the same tree, and we've definitely seen the disadvantages. > The time frame I imagine for this is when OpenVPN 2.2 is released. > That's a reasonable time to think this through and we need to do some > other improvements to the git tree when we release OpenVPN 2.2. As a > side-note, I hope we will be able to get 2.2 released within this year. Do you consider the build system / git tree organization a new feature? Or could the first non-beta/rc 2.2 release use the separated build systems? > Alon, when it comes to your patch, I've looked at it, and it looks sane > to me. But as I'm neither a Windows developer nor an autotools expert, > I'll wait for an ACK from someone who can understand it better. But > I'll try to remember to bring it up on Thursday's developments meeting, > unless someone ACKs it earlier. I added Alon's patch and this build system modularization to next meeting's topic list:
<https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/Topics-2010-09-23> James probably has some insights about the issues with our current build system. I'm also sure he can ACK Alon's patch if nobody else does it first. -- Samuli Seppänen Community Manager OpenVPN Technologies, Inc irc freenode net: mattock
