2010/4/16 Marc-Antoine Ruel <mar...@chromium.org> > Thanks Nico for digging up the archive. > > As I said in the other thread, the people at the session mostly looked > about reducing the number of build system, not forcing anyone to use any > tool. If some teams wants to switch to CMake, prefect as long as the number > of build tool reduces. Nobody seemed willing to switch to qtmake. Nobody at > the meeting advocated for CMake. > > I don't have first-hand experience about CMake but from I only heard midly > negative comments. The generated xcodeproj and vcproj are far from 'native' > and from f2f discussion, at least one llvm guy isn't happy about CMake and > would rather move it off. The 'native' IDE feel was very high in our > priority list, especially in XCode in fact. > > > 2010/4/16 Adam Treat <tr...@kde.org> > > On Friday 16 April 2010 09:58:17 pm Bill Hoffman wrote: >> > > Also: how hard is the dependency on being "installed"? Is this a >> solvable >> > > problem if it turns out to be a showstopper for some folks? >> > >> > It has to be installed, if this is a show stopper, then it is a show >> > stopper. >> >> To be clear, it just has to be in the path, right? Which I think could be >> managed ;) >> > > I don't know if anyone really cares about the requirement of having another > tool installed on the system or not as an hinderance, I don't mind. > > So in the end, if some team want to switch to CMake, just check-in stuff. > :) >
... and deprecate the prior build system! > > Not that my opinion counts at all. > > -- > M-A > -- M-A
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev