On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:40 AM Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:32 AM Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:12 AM Gert Wollny <gw.foss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I second that, I voiced my concerns in a former thread, especially that > > > so far this upcoming change has not been officially announced in the > > > release notes or on mesa-user, and that I don't understand why it is so > > > urgent to drop autotools when there is still someone who offers to > > > maintain it and some who prefer to use it. > > > > It's because the objective is to have as few build systems as > > necessary. This is an obvious first step and has been a stated goal > > for more than a year. I'm surprised that you're surprised. > > > > Let's just make an external contrib repo and keep all the autotools > > files there. Then Emil and company can continue having fun maintaining > > autotools and all you'll need to do is rsync into the Mesa repo to use > > autotools. > > So ... not last call for autotools? More like "railroad notification > that the train is in motion"?
I wouldn't say that, but I think it is pretty apparent that people haven't attempted to switch before some of these recent discussions. So.. not sure how better to handle it. > This kind of talk just causes everyone to entrench into their > positions, so I'd rather avoid it. I'm not opposed to switching build > systems in principle, but the current proposal is, in my and seemingly > some other people's views, inadequate. Let's make it adequate before > dropping the thing that works for everyone. How can we make it adequate if people never even test the thing we've been talking about deleting autotools in favor or for 15 months? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
