Hi Mukund, On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:39:19 +0530 Mukund Sivaraman <muks@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Shlomi > > On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 01:21:03PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote: > > In any case, I would be willing to work on porting GIMP's build system to > > CMake, as long as there is a general agreement from GIMP's developers that > > CMake will be available in addition or instead of GNU Autotools (so I won't > > work for naught). > > Automake has served GIMP well so far. I recall running into many problems with the Automake/Autoconf/libtool/etc. setup on many projects, including the breaking of a lot of backwards-compatibility and forward-compatibility. I don't recall anything specific with GIMP in particular, but it can happen. > We also have several people who > know automake well enough to help other developers if they are unable > to find their way. Well, I know CMake pretty well, and CMake is much easier to learn than Autohell. It took me less time to convert Freecell Solver’s build system from GNU Autotools to CMake than it did to originally autoconfiscate it (and that was with learning CMake on the fly and without knowing it beforehand). A different developer on Freenode's ##programming testified a similar experience with his own project. > Do we need to change to CMake? Nobody has given > reasons so far, just assumed that we'd like to switch to CMake. It > would substitute one hell for another. Well, I have given many reasons here: http://www.shlomifish.org/open-source/anti/autohell/ You should have followed and read the link. This reminds me of Larry Wall's analogy of a ball in a local minima that can exert some effort into climbing a hill and then reaching an even lower pit where it will be happier (but thinks that the higher pit is fine). And I should note that CMake is in no way a hell. I never really liked GNU Autotools but thought I needed to use it because that was the only sane solution. Then I discovered CMake and now I'm much happier. BTW, we can keep the old Autotools-based setup for the time being in case we want it because it can co-exist along with the CMake-based one. > > Same applies for Qt. I never said I support switching GIMP to Qt. > These suggestions keep coming up again and again. > GIMP should be rewritten in C++, GIMP should use some other new thing, > etc. Many times I look at how GIMP does something (in its tree) as an > example of how to do something nearly perfectly. Well, we can keep the way GIMP does things as it is just fine and just add a CMake-based build system. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Stop Using MSIE - http://www.shlomifish.org/no-ie/ Beliefs are what divide people. Doubt unites them. — http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Peter_Ustinov Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
