apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sander Striker <stri...@apache.org>
Subject Re: apr/apr-util python dependence
Date Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:13:44 GMT
On Fri, 2004-02-20 at 19:59, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
> > 
> > > I hate to chime in here, but I must agree. Things have certainly
> > > come a long way when the build/configure system tried to
> > > be as LCD (lowest common denominator) as possible.
> > 
> > And it was a recursive make solution which we're trying to fix. If you can
> > come up with an LCD approach which has a single top-level Makefile, then
> > please feel free.
> > 
> > > If we require all this "extra" stuff, then, at least to my
> > > mind, it means that we need to rethink not just patch.
> > 
> > Oh, come on. For somebody building straight from CVS, to add a Python
> > dependence? Okay, so it caught a few people unawares. We make changes like
> > that all the time. But this one is not hard to solve.
> > 
> > In any case, this whole notion of "rewrite as a shell script" just isn't
> > going to fly.
> :)
> No, I have no solutions, nor did I mean to imply that:
>     o Such a solution is trivial
>     o That the solution used was done with no
>       thought of impact to developers.

Thanks Jim, for being explicit with that.

I think this thread needed some of that explicitness,
since it is beginning to show agitation across the board
with the participants.

I think there is a lot of potential to get religous
in this thread, and that is indeed not where we want
to go.

Now, if we were using Subversion I would suggest that
Greg create a branch, code the lot up, and then merge
the final build system back.  Heck, I'll even suggest
that while using CVS.

When a similar build system was introduced for Subversion,
it broke builds for at least some developers.  It took a
bit of effort to get the problems out, but it was worth

If we are going in this direction, and I prefer we do,
(if only for the sake to see where this goes) I'd like
to see it happen on a branch, so that the migration can
be smooth instead of clunky accompagnied with lots of


View raw message