Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 17:39:26 +0200
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: YUriy Zhuravlev <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2
Message-ID: <20150828153926.GG4857@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <4184974.kkvGJ5GoEX@dinodell>
 <20150828153245.GD2912@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150828153245.GD2912@alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 2015-08-28 12:32:45 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> YUriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> > Hello Hackers
> > 
> > How would you react if I provided a patch which introduces a CMake build 
> > system?
> 
> What's your motivation for doing so?

I definitely can see some advantages. Non-broken dependencies around
recursive make being a major one. But I'm also afraid it's a rather
large undertaking. There's a fair number of special kind of rules, and
we're probably not going to want to break pgxs for extensions.

I also have some doubts around the portability of cmake and it's
generated makefiles. We do support some odd platforms.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers