https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113121
Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #6 from Eyal Rozenberg <[email protected]> --- I don't do LO development, but as a C++ developer on several other projects, including one-and-a-half which transitioned to CMake, I have found the adoption of CMake to be a useful endeavor, in several senses: * Typically reduces the amount of custom code relating to build configuration. * Improves portability - although that requires a bit of care when writing the build description files (called CMakeLists.txt in CMake) * Facilitates building with different tools, e.g. both Make and Ninja - with the latter speeding up build times somewhat. * Provides convenient TUI and GUI for reviewing and controlling build parameters/options. * Makes it easier to rely on 3rd-party libraries in any number of ways (OS distro, fetching from source repository, interaction with package managers such as conan, etc.) * Reasonably straightforward to invoke Also, the Kitware people have a mediocre-to-good responsiveness to bug reports. I've done more than a bit of QA on CMake itself w.r.t. CUDA support, and many of the issues I've brought up have been resolved, sometimes even quickly. I am guessing they would be even more responsive to LibreOffice as a project - perhaps it's worth approaching them. ---- All of the above is only partially the case-, again in my experience, with Meson. I find it is less flexible, more finicky, harder for newcomers, and has more problems with interaction/composition of multiple projects. Thorsten said (?) that "there are load of unsolved problems with the build system, though" - I would feel better trying to tackle those with CMake, not meson. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
