Hi, I've been added in this thread without much context, not sure which project it's speaking about. > > Is it too naive to expect that's it's safe to just turn the flip on > > meson, > > and remove autotools? > > > > Everyone doing packaging is already aware and used to meson. > > If we add meson as an option and keep autotools supported in > parallel, > there's a high change packagers won't notice, so it won't help much. > I'd > recommend reaching out to known packagers (major distros, buildroot, > ...) to let them know of the move. If any of them requests to have > time > to adapt, then we could support both build systems in parallel. > Otherwise, I'd just flip the switch. >From past experience, distros tend to find many small issues with build systems, especially debian who have tones of scripts to verify what changed in the package: a missing installed file, a missing build option, missing build flag, etc. You can either deal with that and roll a quick point release to fix any issue they could find, or keep both build systems for a couple releases while recommending downstream (a note in ChangeLog) to try the meson build system, making it clear autotools is going away. Regards, Xavier Claessens.
