Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-31 Thread Milan Crha
On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 18:10 +0100, Sam Thursfield wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 3:23 PM, 藍挺瑋 wrote: > > 於 週三,2016-10-05 於 09:33 +0200,Milan Crha 提到: > > Can we have a common way to enable GTK-Doc installation in modules > > using CMake? In modules using Autotools, we have

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-27 Thread Sam Thursfield
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 3:23 PM, 藍挺瑋 wrote: > 於 週三,2016-10-05 於 09:33 +0200,Milan Crha 提到: > Can we have a common way to enable GTK-Doc installation in modules > using CMake? In modules using Autotools, we have --enable-gtk-doc which > is recognized by every module supporting

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-27 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
It would be nice to have gobject-introspection ship a cmake module as well. I've already had to fix libical and evolution-data-server in Continuous because of a mismatch between Makefile.introspection and cmake. Additionally, if somebody well versed in cmake could help out with this issue, it

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-27 Thread 藍挺瑋
於 週三,2016-10-05 於 09:33 +0200,Milan Crha 提到: > Hello, > this is a heads up that the evolution-data-server, evolution, > evolution-ews and evolution-mapi products will switch from Autotools > to > CMake for the 3.23.1 release. Each of them has created a wip/cmake > branch, which builds and

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Adrián Pérez de Castro
Hello all, Quoting Simon McVittie (2016-10-10 20:57:01) > On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 12:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 12:57 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > > Can you propose what the necessary change would be to: > > > > > >  

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
Le lundi 10 octobre 2016 à 10:01 +0200, Milan Crha a écrit : > On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 09:39 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > > > > Also, does CMake support make distcheck yet ? As a downstream > > maintainer, I find many packages with errors in distributed sources > > would have been caught

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Simon McVittie
On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 12:45 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 12:57 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > Can you propose what the necessary change would be to: > > > >  https://people.gnome.org/~walters/build-api/build-api.md > > Well that document is Autotools-specific. It would

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Michael Catanzaro
On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 11:51 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > To get them building again from HEAD again, what you can do is add a > compatibility configure script as described in: I don't want to add compatibility configure scripts to GNOME modules that switch to CMake or Meson. Continuous should just

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Michael Catanzaro
On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 12:57 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > I agree about whatever we switch GNOME over to en-masse, but for > scattered projects, I'm less sure, and I'm particularly less sure > about > CMake, where there seems to be a certain lack of uniformity. Hm yes, that's one of the

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Owen Taylor
On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 11:37 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 11:51 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > To get them building again from HEAD again, what you can do is add > > a > > compatibility configure script as described in: > > I don't want to add compatibility configure

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Milan Crha
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 09:33 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > I plan to merge the changes the next Monday, October 10th, some time > after the 3.22.1 release. This way there will be enough time to catch > any issues before the 3.23.1 release. Hi, this is a notice that the changes had been

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-10 Thread Milan Crha
On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 09:39 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > Also, does CMake support make distcheck yet ? As a downstream > maintainer, I find many packages with errors in distributed sources > would have been caught by make distcheck when releasing. Hi, CMake doesn't "support" it

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Michael Catanzaro
Hi, This is fine from a release team perspective, as we're already set up to handle CMake modules. Just make sure to update the JHbuild moduselets and Continuous manifest at the same time you make the change. There are already examples of how to handle CMake projects (e.g. WebKitGTK+). I'm a

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Michael Biebl
2016-10-05 14:54 GMT+02:00 Michael Catanzaro : > I'm a little surprised at the use of CMake instead of meson, but that's > your choice to make. As much as I hate autotools and its arcane syntax, it does bring uniformity and consistency. Atm I'm counting waf (for some

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Paul Smith
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 15:13 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > seems to be better than autotools, gives more freedom and easily > allows the sources to be built much faster than with autotools (it > builds here in ~1/3 of the time which uses autotools, still using > "Unix Makefiles"). I know it's caused

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Milan Crha
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 12:28 +0100, Philip Withnall wrote: > Out of interest, why? Hi, seems to be better than autotools, gives more freedom and easily allows the sources to be built much faster than with autotools (it builds here in ~1/3 of the time which uses autotools, still using "Unix

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Bastien Nocera
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 09:33 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > Hello, > this is a heads up that the evolution-data-server, evolution, > evolution-ews and evolution-mapi products will switch from Autotools > to > CMake for the 3.23.1 release. The email doesn't explain the most important part though.

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Philip Withnall
On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 09:33 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > Hello, > this is a heads up that the evolution-data-server, evolution, > evolution-ews and evolution-mapi products will switch from Autotools to > CMake for the 3.23.1 release. Out of interest, why? Philip signature.asc Description:

[Evolution-hackers] Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products

2016-10-05 Thread Milan Crha
Hello, this is a heads up that the evolution-data-server, evolution, evolution-ews and evolution-mapi products will switch from Autotools to CMake for the 3.23.1 release. Each of them has created a wip/cmake branch, which builds and even runs. I tried to keep things as close as they were