I am; note the subject line.
That is not enough to make me talk about it. My concern is not what
you call a 'documentation strategy'. I think that's tail chasing,
mostly. My concern is what I see as a tendency towards overbroad
generalizations on your part.
It's long and run-on but properly constructed. Is English not your
1st language? Note the implicit "then," i.e. "[then] there are lotsa
extra barriers."
When told that one is being unclear, it's usually better make things
clear than to argue you're being perfectly clear. Also, run-on
sentence construction is considered a grammatical error, which means
that it's not properly constructed.
>>> The projects that see CMake as a slam dunk, are the ones that
did an
>>> Autoconf build for the Unix stuff, and also had to maintain some
>>> horrible hand rolled Visual Studio build, typically with .BAT
files.
No, when you are definitely planning to port to Windows, and picking
tools on that basis, you are not doing a Unix-only project anymore.
You are at the planning stage of a cross-platform project.
Please compare what you said, which I said was overly broad, with
what you are now saying, which is substantially different.
I have said what I intended to say, and for that reason I think I'm
finished here. Please stop being overly broad; it just undercuts
what you're trying to argue.
--
Robert J. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Most people are never thought about after they're gone. 'I wonder
where Rob got the plutonium?' is better than most get." -- Phil Munson
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
