Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > ... > > > Adding FPHSA2.cmake now in 2.8.3 is safe now, but not as soon as new > > features are added to it in 2.8.4 or later versions. > > Projects will have copies of it and it can

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Tuesday 12 October 2010, Brad King wrote: ... > > Currently projects have the option to override it with CMAKE_MODULE_PATH > > to providing a module with the same API but a tweaked implementation. > > With the CURRENT_LIST_DIR approach th

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > Adding FPHSA2.cmake now in 2.8.3 is safe now, but not as soon as new > features are added to it in 2.8.4 or later versions. > Projects will have copies of it and it can break just the same way then. Example: assume projects will take a

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Wednesday 13 October 2010, Bill Hoffman wrote: > So, I think we have to use the new name approach. Do we want to call it > 2? Or should we call it something else? > > Alex, do you have time to do this? I think it's not a good solution, and the one with CURRENT_LIST_DIR is definitely better a

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Tuesday 12 October 2010, Brad King wrote: > On 10/12/2010 03:32 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Tuesday 12 October 2010, Bill Hoffman wrote: > >> Anyway, in the short term, we are going to go with FPHSA2, Alex do you > >> have time to do that? > > > > FPHSA2 would have been my last choice.

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Alexander Neundorf
On Tuesday 12 October 2010, David Cole wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Brad King wrote: ... > > releases and will get us through this CMake rc cycle safely. Future > > enhancements to FPHSA2 may need yet another new module, but I think > > that is in the nature of this particular funct

[cmake-developers] [CMake 0011311]: Visual Studio 2008 MIDL and cmake 2.8.2

2010-10-13 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker
The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=11311 == Reported By:Julian Lim Assigned To: =

Re: [cmake-developers] User vs CMake include mismatch handling

2010-10-13 Thread Bill Hoffman
So, I think we have to use the new name approach. Do we want to call it 2? Or should we call it something else? Alex, do you have time to do this? I want to get the CMake release out very soon. Thanks. -Bill ___ cmake-developers mailing list cmake

[cmake-developers] [CMake 0011310]: vim script to open --help-command output in a split window

2010-10-13 Thread Mantis Bug Tracker
The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=11310 == Reported By:Matthias Kretz Assigned To: