[Bf-committers] WITH_OPENEXR required in file that defines it afterwards?

[Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Chris Want wrote:
> Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva wrote:
>> If for some reason this can't be modified in this way, then I believe
>> that the CMakeLists.txt at
>> source/blender/imbuf/intern/openexr/CMakeLists.txt should be modified
>> with the following snippet as in other cases throughout the code:
>>
>> IF(WITH_OPENEXR)
>>   ADD_DEFINITIONS(-DWITH_OPENEXR)
>> ENDIF(WITH_OPENEXR)
>
> I've committed this to SVN since I also don't understand the reason
> why the various compilation conditions were added to openexr_api.cpp.

Thanks.

>> I would like to know if the CMake build system is actively maintained?
>> Are there any docs with bugs or missing features related to the CMake
>> build? What is the policy to update the minimum required version of
>> CMake needed to compile blender?
>
> I would say that it is actively maintained in the sense that
> there are some developers who like using it and would like
> to see it continue. Unfortunately, the developer who initiated
> the CMake support vanished a couple of years ago, so there
> isn't strong leadership in this area. As things are, changes
> to the CMake system happen when either a committer sees a
> problem that they can solve and fixes it (such as adding a
> library dependency), or when non-committers such as yourself
> submits a fix (thanks!).

Ok. I'll probably be looking at the code and maybe actively developing
it, so if I get there I can certainly contribute with the cmake files.

> As for updating the minimum required version needed, there
> would need to be a compelling reason to do this -- is there
> a newer feature in CMake that you need?

Well, I was just curious to know how to contribute and the policies.
Basically, I was looking at the complexity of the blender code and
interdependencies. I think that CMake 2.6 brings a lot of features in
the lines of target dependent properties, functions for scoping, etc.

But I don't have concrete cases at hand or experience with the build
process, so I don't think this discussion is worth our time for now.
In the future, I might bring this up again if there is in fact a
compelling reason.

Thanks,
--Miguel