Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1ZVj9F-0004i2-RB for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:38:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZVj9F-0005gB-BG for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:38:33 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZVj7v-0003lx-JI for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:37:11 +0000 Received: from newmail.postgrespro.ru ([93.174.131.138] helo=mail.postgrespro.ru) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZVj7s-0002gF-Nk for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 16:37:10 +0000 Received: from dinodell.localnet (0894949280.static.corbina.ru [78.107.237.198]) by mail.postgrespro.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F04DA21C2DA9; Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:37:06 +0300 (MSK) From: YUriy Zhuravlev To: Christopher Browne Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2 Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 19:36:21 +0300 Message-ID: <2844430.7oqKMGMpEj@dinodell> Organization: postgrespro User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.0-gentoo; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <4184974.kkvGJ5GoEX@dinodell> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On Friday 28 August 2015 13:51:30 you wrote: > It's broadly interesting, but since it bakes in a build dependency on > CMake, there is some risk that the dependencies become an insurmountable > problem. > > (Does CMake run on a VAX 11/780?? :-)) http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=13605 you about this? > > It is probably worth a try, to see what improvements arise, albeit with the > need to accept some risk of refusal of the change. > > The experiment is most likely necessary: we won't know the benefits without > trying. You right. > > If the results represent little improvement, there will be little or no > appetite to jump through the dependency hoops needed to get the change > accepted. > > On the other hand, if there are big gains, that encourages pushing thru the > dependency issues. > > On Aug 28, 2015 10:45, "YUriy Zhuravlev" wrote: > > Hello Hackers > > > > How would you react if I provided a patch which introduces a CMake build > > system? > > > > Old thread: > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/200812291325.13354.peter_e@gmx.net > > > > The main argument against the "it's too hard". I'm right? > > > > Thanks! > > -- > > YUriy Zhuravlev > > Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com > > The Russian Postgres Company > > > > > > -- > > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > > To make changes to your subscription: > > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- YUriy Zhuravlev Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers