+1 from me
On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 17:36 -0500, Ken Giusti wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Andrew Stitcher" <astitc...@redhat.com>
> > To: "proton" <proton@qpid.apache.org>, "Qpid Developers" <dev@qpid.
> > apache.org>
> > Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 5:03:40 PM
> > Subject: Dropping proton-dump; Moving to newer minimum CMake
> > version
> > 
> > I've been doing some build tree maintenance in Proton and a couple
> > of
> > issues have come up:
> > 
> > 1. Is anyone using/have a reason to want to keep proton-dump?
> 
> Nope - get rid of it.
> 
> > It's a
> > somewhat odd program that seems to have been a debugging tool left
> > over
> > from the very earliest days of proton.
> > 
> > It uses the internals of the proton-c library so it can't be simply
> > linked in with the qpid-proton library without exposing internal
> > symbols.
> > 
> > For the present I've just linked it directly with the few c files
> > that
> > provide the symbols it needs.
> > 
> > 2. I'd like to move the minimum required CMake version to 2.8.7 -
> > This
> > will allow me to tidy up a certain amount of the build system and
> > also
> > provide a somewhat more featureful base version of CMake (currently
> > we
> > support 2.6 onwards)
> > 
> > As far as I can tell:
> > 
> > Ubuntu12.04LTS: CMake 2.8.7 (version on regular TravisCI build)
> > RHEL6: CMake 2.8.12
> > Debian Wheezy (7): CMake 2.8.9
> > Fedora 22: CMake 3.4.1
> > 
> 
> In general +1.  What version does Windows use?
> 
> > Version of CMake on appveyor currently seems to be at least 3.3.2
> > 
> > So I don't think there should be a probelm for anyone with this
> > change.
> > 
> > I'll wait for 3 days and if I don't hear anything from anyone, I'll
> > assume that no one wants to keep proton-dump and no one objects to
> > upping the minimum supported version of CMake.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > Andrew
> > 
> > 
> 

Reply via email to