From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Isaac Hier <isaachier@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Implement CMake build
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 10:47:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqpo5zdrgm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG6xkCZn6m2n0rDvpN6MmZcOr2hJBRCfhrppC37f-DUj3_JZsw@mail.gmail.com> (Isaac Hier's message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:45:03 -0500")
Isaac Hier <isaachier@gmail.com> writes:
> I realize this is a huge patch, but does anyone have feedback for the
> general idea?
I personally am not interested, especially with the justification
given in the cover letter.
Perhaps the one in this patch may be "mostly complete", and I am
sure you can make it "complete" against a frozen target, but it is
unclear to me how you envision keeping the completeness up to date.
Whenever a developer needs to introduce a new build knob, the
support for it needs to be implemented in not just Makefile but now
also in this other thing. Unless there is an automated
bi-directional gateway to allow those who have been writing and
reading Makefile not to worry about those who wants to build with
CMake, and vice versa, you are forcing everybody to do the same work
twice, no?
Choice of build procedure for a project is like choise of SCM to
store its source file. If the new system is 10x better to make it
worthwhile to educate everybody to use it, switching to a new system
and ditching the current one *is* a reasonable thing to propose and
consider.
But I do not think you are proposing to switch, and I do not think
you are convincingly arguing that it is 10x better than the current
one, either.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-24 18:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-23 0:16 [RFC PATCH 0/1] Implement CMake build Isaac Hier
2018-01-23 0:16 ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] " Isaac Hier
2018-01-24 13:45 ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] " Isaac Hier
2018-01-24 18:11 ` Jacob Keller
2018-01-24 18:47 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2018-01-24 20:53 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-24 21:15 ` Stephan Beyer
2018-01-24 21:19 ` Isaac Hier
2018-01-24 22:02 ` Stephan Beyer
2018-01-25 2:16 ` Isaac Hier
2018-01-24 19:36 ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-01-24 19:59 ` Isaac Hier
2018-01-24 21:00 ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-01-24 21:17 ` Isaac Hier
2018-01-26 0:21 ` Isaac Hier
2018-01-26 17:34 ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-02-20 16:28 ` Robert Dailey
2018-02-23 18:48 ` Isaac Hier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqpo5zdrgm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=isaachier@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).