incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: gnumake4 integration (was: Re: [Code] strategy for "child works spaces")
Date Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:39:24 GMT
+1 from me

I am pretty sure this wont interfere with the IP Clearance
that is left and even there, getting us less dependent on
Dmake is good.

Pedro.

--- On Fri, 11/25/11, Ariel Constenla-Haile <arielch@apache.org> wrote:
...
> Hi Pedro, *
> 
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 01:59:38PM -0800, Pedro Giffuni
> wrote:
> > Hi;
> > 
> > It looks like the IP Clearance stuff is under
> > control so I would like to move completely to
> > a development branch if you guys create it.
> > 
> > I also suspect the FreeBSD port will need
> > adjustments for the new gnumake stuff.
> 
> I have finished building on Fedora 16 64 bits, and fixing
> some issues.
> I started building on WinXP (a VM, so it takes 5 hrs).
> 
> I'm not sure if the gnumake4 integration should be moved to
> a feature
> branch. It is highly probable that it won't introduce any
> regression on
> the core functionality, as most changes are made to
> Makefiles, and in
> the cases where the source code was, it only had to do with
> fixing the
> exported symbols, among other little changes; there are no
> core new 
> features, it is only the build system.
> 
> IMO everybody will benefit from its integration in the
> trunk, so I'd
> vote for integrating this into trunk.
> Of course, it is highly probable that our builds will
> brake, but it can 
> be fixed soon, while people is building.
> 
> On the other hand, having this in a feature branch will
> mean more work
> with merging the trunk changesets (I already had to do this
> with the
> cppunit removal, which by the way would have been more
> simple and clean 
> with the gnumake4 changes).
> 
> What do you guys think?
> 
> Regards
> -- 
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina
> 

Mime
View raw message