Hi Martin, On 4/11/07, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yet, please consider that I'm _not_ primarily looking for a solution to the trouble _I_ have with your decision to force the use of CMake, I'm trying to look a bit further and experience tells me that people will tell lots of really ugly words about OSG if such a portability nuisance would end up in a release.
The intention with moving to CMake is to fix problems with the previous build systems (we had three in place), and to make it much slicker and user friendly. There are obviously downsides with the move - it does force CMake on to people for the first time, adds an extra hurdle in developing with the OSG. Right now the hurdle is higher because the new CMake build system is new and still under development. Once we ground out the build system things and get things documented better should go more smoothly for all concerned. Originally I was skeptic about CMake, but having used fulltime development for the last month I gotta save I love it. I'm more productive, I can fix things in the OSG w.r.t file naming, creating new projects, removing old ones without worry about having to update 3 different build systems, the chances of breaking the build have gone down substantially. This in turn should lead to easier life for me getting release out, and end users using the SVN version of the OSG. I wouldn't have moved across to CMake if I didn't think it had the ability to improve the project, I'm confident that once we've smoothed out the problems we have now it'll be a great boon for end users and their projects too. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
