Hi Junio, On Wed, 23 Sep 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > > All I want is for the CMake support to be easier to use, yet we go in the > > opposite direction: instead of allowing to use CMake under more > > circumstances (which actually *works*, we just don't have the appropriate > > Not, "more", but what you are doing is to ensure it is used at only > one single place, which is the top-level (and nowhere else, judging > from the .gitignore additions). > > And that is fine---if you were to add .gitignore entries, you cannot > leave it up to the end-users where the build happens. > > So, let's not pretend that you are allowing "more circumstances". > Forcing a single choice to make things predictable is fine, but > let's explain it as such, so that people won't be confused into > thinking that they can follow their experiences gained from using > CMake in other projects that lets them build in a separate > directory. The other things in our project, including the > patterns added to .gitignore with the patch in question, are not set > up to allow that. While I respectfully disagree that I force a single choice on anybody, I do agree that there is value in having one recommended route that is well supported. Thanks, Dscho
