+1 Andrew's proposed schedule and Alan's fiendish scheme. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrew Stitcher" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: "Cliff Jansen" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:59:52 PM > Subject: Re: Proposal: get rid of automake build system. > > On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 14:24 -0400, Alan Conway wrote: > > On 03/11/2013 01:24 PM, Andrew Stitcher wrote: > > ... > > > I agree with this approach, but I suggest that we prioritise > > > getting the > > > cmake build instructions into The 0.22 Readme, and suggest in the > > > release notes that people prefer to use cmake to build rather > > > than > > > autotools. That way we'll get a flood of bug reports in the 0.22 > > > time > > > frame and fix them for 0.24 when we get serious! > > > > > > > Just to be clear: do you agree with having configure fail with a > > deprecation > > warning unless --use-deprecated=yes? We do want to update the doc & > > release > > notes but those are easily missed by people who are already used to > > building > > Qpid. A build failure is hard to miss. > > Sorry not to be clear enough. > > Before and for the 0.22 release (the one that just went into alpha) > We > should make sure we get the README and unix build instructions up to > date and telling people how to use cmake and elevating it to the > preferred method in the README (leave the autotools instructions in > at > the bottom and note them as deprecated - but for 0.22 only in these > docs) > > Then for 0.24, (ie on trunk as soon as we release 0.22) we carry out > your fiendish scheme of making the autotools configure fail with a > warning etc. > > Then for 0.26 We actually remove autotools completely. > > The idea here is to get people building 0.22 with cmake by making it > the > preferred instruction in the README/INSTALL doc and reporting bugs to > us, but to still "allow" them and support them building with > autotools > if it fails badly for them for some reason. > > The corollary is that failing to build with cmake won't be a blocker > for > 0.22, but it will start to be a blocker from 0.24 onwards. > > Andrew > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
-- -K --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
