On 15 March 2013 16:14, Fraser Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
> It would by me :-) and I guess by you given a previous post you made about
> automake finally working for you too.
>
> I rather suspect we might be the guinea pigs :-D

Indeed - though I would also note that the Jenkins CI tests run on
Ubuntu too and we have those building and testing the C++ Broker
(using automake right now)... would be a shame to break the CI builds
too.

What I think the project needs is a clear statement on the platforms
the build is expected to work on... so that if it doesn't we as the
Qpid project are committed to fixing it.

>
> I did hear from a colleague of mine that cmake didn't work on a fairly old
> RH version he had to use, I suggested that he post exactly what he's been
> seeing.
>
> My guess is that the "user" community might be wider and more disparate than
> the "dev" community whom I guess have a lot of RedHat blood, so hopefully
> it'll either "just work" or there'll be an avalanche of bug reports PDQ.
>
> Frase
>
>

-- Rob

>
> On 15/03/13 15:04, Rob Godfrey wrote:
>>
>> Can I ask which platforms/OSs are are going to be "supported" by this
>> build.
>>
>> Obviously you guys care about Fedora/RedHat based systems, and
>> Windows... But would not building on Ubuntu (for instance) be
>> considered a blocker?
>>
>> -- Rob
>>
>>
>> On 15 March 2013 15:29, Alan Conway <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/15/2013 10:24 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Would it also be an idea to have the 0.22 Automake build echo a message
>>>> indicating that it will become deprecated in the next release and
>>>> removed
>>>> in the release after that?
>>>>
>>>> Lots of people dont read readme files and thus wont actually find out
>>>> until
>>>> they try 0.24 and discover it wont work until they add the option to
>>>> enable
>>>> it, and it might be helpful to try and inform them now.
>>>
>>>
>>> +1. I propose a slightly stronger version: configure will _fail_ by
>>> default
>>> and print the message. Users can continue to use automake by adding
>>> --enable-deprecated=yes to configure.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Robbie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11 March 2013 18:59, Andrew Stitcher <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to