On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 1/27/17 6:11 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2017-01-27 09:09:36 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> My preferred scenario would be to replace the Windows build system by
>>> this first, then refine it, then get rid of Autoconf.
>>> The ideal timeline would be to have a ready patch to commit early in a
>>> development cycle, then get rid of the Windows build system by the end
>>> of it.  Naturally, this would need buy-in from Windows developers.
>>> I don't foresee replacing the Autoconf build system by this immediately.
>> I'm very strongly against this path, it seems way too likely that we'll
>> end up with yet another fragile thing that nobody from the *nix side
>> will be able to test.
> That's a fair concern, but at least with CMake, someone from the *nix
> side *can* test it, whereas right now it's completely separate.

And people complain all the time that the MSVC build scripts are hacky
and complicated.. So by beginning from there we switch from one build
to the other, not increasing the number of builds that need to be
maintained. Based on that Peter's strategy looks appealing to me. By
the way, I am marking the patch as returned with feedback for this CF.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to