On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Stuart Webster <[email protected]> wrote: > I think those are practical suggestions. Mikko raised the point that we > shouldn't drop support for VC9 in a point release of 0MQ 2.1 for reasons > of backwards compatibility. I'm not sure whether he was referring to > compatibility with other components or other toolsets. Could you please > elaborate, Mikko? I can't see how backwards compatibility is a > significant issue.
Hi, 2.1 series is currently stable and we cannot change the build files to MSVC10 format (which is not backwards compatible with the earlier versions) in the middle of the cycle. In my opinion stable doesn't mean just the code but also the tools around it including builds. We had a discussions about moving to CMake earlier but I don't think we can give up the autotools due to better cross compilation support. The impression I got from Steven is that CMake is not quite there yet regarding cross builds. Therefore I see very little benefit in adding CMake unless we replace the Windows project files with CMake completely. If not, this just adds another build system to maintain. -- Mikko Koppanen _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
