From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
 YUriy Zhuravlev <u.zhuravlev@postgrespro.ru>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WIP: About CMake v2
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+Tgmoa4YVONuV+xPFe242JUYpsRB8O31YZ8sJm4tXmRY5sndA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4184974.kkvGJ5GoEX@dinodell>
 <20150828153245.GD2912@alvherre.pgsql>
 <20150828153926.GG4857@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <CA+Tgmoa4YVONuV+xPFe242JUYpsRB8O31YZ8sJm4tXmRY5sndA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
 message dated "Tue, 01 Sep 2015 09:41:56 -0400"
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 10:05:44 -0400
Message-ID: <7931.1441116344@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I guess I'm a bit skeptical about the idea of porting to a new build
> system.  There's a good chance of replacing the problems we know about
> with new problems that are no less serious, but merely unknown to us.
> But I'm not going to stand here and hold my breath if everyone else
> thinks it's a good idea.

FWIW, I'm also skeptical that this experiment will succeed.  I think it
is worth trying ... but I'm by no means promising to buy into the result.

There is precedent for this sort of thing: mysql converted from
autoconf+gmake to cmake a few years back, and AFAIK they've not
regretted it.  So that's a data point that a project of complexity
more or less similar to ours can make the change.

Where I do *not* want to end up is maintaining *three* build systems.
So I'll definitely resist any proposals to commit a partly-done cmake
conversion (which I fear might seem attractive at some point).

			regards, tom lane


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