Russel Winder <> writes:

>> Before adopting a new build system, I'd like to see written
>> requirements
>> for the build system, specifically including portability and cross
>> building, and to see an analysis of how there will be no regressions.
> This is a clear management tool to say "we are not going to do this".
> Unlike the comment "Show us it working and we'll think about it" which
> is positive, "write a proposal document" is, to a software project,
> management speak that means "we will put up barriers to avoid any
> change".

Not at all.  It's a reaction to seeing previous projects broken by
people who want to change to shiny new tool of the month, resulting in
losing the ability to cross build.  What I asked for is a page, maybe 2,
so that shiny-new-tool proponents will realize that there is more to a
build system than working for their use case.

In the particular case I'm referring, the shiny things that replaced
autotools was scons, and it's still causing problems, even years later.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Geeqie-devel mailing list

Reply via email to