couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Newson <robert.new...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Problems releasing 0.10.1 (nslater, back at you!)
Date Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:26:54 GMT
Just to break the monotony of the ping-pong session, I value the
effort Noah is exerting to make the build system this solid. I get
Paul's pragmatic approach too, but I personally side with doing the
build/autoconf thing right up front and head off weird build and
packaging horrors as early as possible.

/cranes neck back in

B.

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>
> On 8 Nov 2009, at 18:45, Paul Davis wrote:
>
>> Who in the world actually does this?
>
> Ubuntu, Debian, etc. I'm sure there are many more.
>
> VPATH builds are commonplace where automation is used.
>
> End users don't usually use them, but we target more than just end users.
>
>> I would be much less whiney if I all of a sudden found out that we have
>> someone being uberawesome and running make distcheck on many many
>> platforms and as part of that setup used the VPATH builds.
>
> Forget distcheck, this is broken for check with a VPATH setup.
>
>> Of course its possible. Just check if you have source files in your
>> build directory.
>
> I cannot agree to a change that makes the test suite non-functional for
> VPATH builds.
>
>> I don't follow. I'm assuming that not lots of people use VPATH builds.
>
> Yes, I that is an unfounded assumption.
>
>> If there is some hidden build factory out there that's being kind
>> enough to build CouchDB on many platforms then I'd be orders of
>> magnitude more interested in making this work.
>
> Ubuntu, Debian, etc.
>
>> But the current trend I see is that it breaks distcheck.
>
> Forget distcheck, that is a symptom of check not working for VPATH setups.
>
>> To me, I'm not seeing the motivation
>> to do anything more than run the checks as part of distsign as opposed
>> to distcheck.
>
> You're treating the symptoms, and not the cause.
>
> The cause is that our test suite cannot handle VPATH settups.
>
> This is a bug.
>
>> I haven't been convinced that this is a wrong vs. right issue.
>
> We use an Autoconf build system, so we should support VPATH setups.
>
>> There is a lot of extra stuff that goes into VPATH builds and making sure
>> they work properly..
>
>> And its just added weight as we accumulate more
>> and more testing and build infrastructure. I just haven't been
>> convinced that there's a reason we should carry that.
>
> Because we're trying to grow our user base, not shrink it - and that means
> not cutting off deployment scenarios because it was a bit of a chore to get
> it working properly.
>
> This behaviour is not some new crazy feature I dreamt up one night, it's a
> standard, and well understood part of having an Autoconf build system -
> arguably the oldest active, and most popular open source build system that
> exists.
>
> And sure, it's tricky. But packaging is hard, welcome to packaging.
>

Mime
View raw message