On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 5:49 PM Alex Deucher <alexdeuc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 8:26 PM Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: > > > > Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I can see why people may opt to not use or maintain the autotools build. > > > Although I would kindly ask that we do not remove it just yet. > > > > > > In Mesa, we have different parts not used by different teams. As such > > > we tend to remove stuff when nobody is around to maintain it anymore. > > > > > > That said, I'm planning to continue maintaining it and would appreciate > > > if we keep it in-tree. > > > > > > As people may be concerned about bugreports and alike we can trivially > > > add a warning (as configure is invoked) to forwards any issues to my > > > email. Additionally (or alternatively) we can have an autotools bugzilla > > > category with me as the default assignee. > > > > > > What do you guys think? > > > > Strongly disagree. We shouldn't be maintaining build systems for fun, > > we should be doing the minimum amount of build system work to get our > > actual work done quickly and reliably. > > If someone has a legitimate use for it and wants to maintain it, why > not? How is the build system any different than a specific feature in > the project?
Restating what I said earlier, a build system is a means, not an end. I would be sympathetic to someone wanting to maintain a driver for old hardware because it's an end, but this is a build system that everyone else is happy, scratch that, excited to be rid of. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
