[Bf-committers] to make or not to make

[Hans Lambermont]

Chris Want wrote:

> Please don't use CMake!

hehe :) and we're back to square 1.

Perhaps a good time to review our requirements, and put them in the
right order-of-importance.

For completeness here are the requirements I used when I designed the
NaN makefiles.

1 Portability. The NaN GNU makefiles work on *all* blender platforms.
  (but windows and osx also have a 2nd build method available)

2 Support for parallel builds. We NFS/SMB mounted all platforms to one
  server such that we could test our code on all platforms before
  committing to the CVS repository. Having multiple builds run from the
  same source tree required having your object files (in fact, *all*
  generated files) *outside* your source tree.

3 Dependencies. Because of 2) the dependencies are platform dependent,
  and as such have to be in the platform dependent object tree.
  Having dependencies delivered us from rebuilding everything over and
  over again from scratch, it saved a lot of time and frustration.

4 Ease of use. Not all NaN employees were makefile guru's. So they
  needed a simple way to add new directories to the system. There are 2
  simple types: 'bounce-to-a-subdir' makefiles, and 'compile stuff' ones.

That's it. The open source project might not be interested in numer 2)
but the rest is still very valid. Oh, 1) is kind for Tinderbox too ;-)

Are 'we' convinced that we should move away from the current setup ?

Hans
-- 
http://lambermont.webhop.org/