On Tuesday, January 12, 2016 10:05:08 Brad King wrote: > On 01/12/2016 05:15 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > > I read Brad's reply as meaning that your cleanup work is a great > > benefit to cmake, but will probably not be available in the > > foreseeable future (if at all). > > Most of Stephen's work completed so far is already in CMake 3.4, and > a bit more is in 'master' and will be in 3.5. It has no public-facing > changes though so yes more work will be needed to get a solution IDEs > can actually use. > > > Alexander goes back to the generator approach we discussed a year ago > > and explicitly says he won't work on that, so nothing will happen > > there. > > The generate-json-description approach remains a valid alternative. > Aleix's work on it got pretty far before Stephen proposed the daemon > alternative. See more below. IIRC Alexander Neundorf raised concerns > only about how to activate the generation of the json description, and > has now proposed an approach to resolve those concerns.
Yes, exactly. But I really don't have the time to bring my branch up to merge quality: tests, documentation, compatibility (?, some generator names will fall away), corner cases. But these things are actually not complicated code, It's just work. Alex -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers