Re: [boost] Request for a "Policy Review" regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'

Subject: Re: [boost] Request for a "Policy Review" regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'
From: Klaim - Joël Lamotte (mjklaim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-17 12:04:16

On 17 May 2016 at 17:57, Thijs (M.A.) van den Berg <thijs_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> > On 17 May 2016, at 17:35, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday, 17 May 2016 18:24:36 MSK Sam Kellett wrote:
> >>> On 17 May 2016 at 16:05, Andrey Semashev
> >> <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I should say that many
> >>> opensource projects practice a separate directory for build-related
> > stuff
> >>> and it doesn't
> >>> hurt anyone (quite the contrary, I'd say).
> >>
> >> which ones?
> >
> > From the ones I have locally: TBB, openh264, webrtc, libvpx,
> > libresiprocate. Well, ok, some of them have a configure script or a
> > single Makefile at the root directory, but most of the build stuff is
> put in
> > a subdirectory.
> >
>
> The way I use CMake and see other use it is indeed to have a single
> CMakeFiles.txt config file in the root, and then do "out of source"
> building.
>
>
One example of project that provide CMake support among other things
without having CMake scripts in it's root directory is the recent versions
of protobuf: https://github.com/google/protobuf
I didn't see any problem so far with this setup.
I don't understand why it's problematic to have cmake scripts outside the
root dir.
I think any build system that impose a particular layout
is a problem.

(my 2cents to this complicated discussion)

Joël Lamotte