Re: WIP: About CMake v2

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2
Date: 2017-01-27 22:50:31
Message-ID: CAB7nPqR-x49EKWkwXV88kpbo09LQrxJXZekk+PjbvCFVfott9w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 1/24/17 8:37 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> Personally I think we should aim to have this in as a non default build
>>> mode in pg10 if it can be made ready, and aim to make it default in pg11 at
>>> least for Windows.
>>
>> AFAIK we haven't committed to accepting this at all, let alone trying
>> to do so on a tight schedule. And I believe there was general agreement
>> that we would not accept it as something to maintain in parallel with
>> the existing makefiles. If we have to maintain two build systems, we
>> have that already.
>
> My preferred scenario would be to replace the Windows build system by
> this first, then refine it, then get rid of Autoconf.
>
> The ideal timeline would be to have a ready patch to commit early in a
> development cycle, then get rid of the Windows build system by the end
> of it. Naturally, this would need buy-in from Windows developers.

This looks like a really good plan to me.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-01-27 22:53:33 Re: Add support to COMMENT ON CURRENT DATABASE
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-01-27 22:48:46 Re: Superowners