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

Subject: Re: [boost] [EXTERNAL] Request for a "Policy Review"regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-20 09:25:16

alex wrote:
> > But if boost can’t make this trivial change to better support cmake, 
> > then it would be hopeless for future changes in boost for better cmake 
> > support.
>
> I don't really have a stake in this, but I think this is the reason why 
> this discussion is so awkward. It seems that 'CMakeLists.txt' is seen by 
> both opponents and proponents as a foot in the door for future changes in 
> Boost for better cmake support.

Yes.

Incidentally, and ironically, a CMake-ified Boost that duplicates our 
current Boost.Build setup would probably have its CMakeLists.txt files in 
build/, so that the top level can glob for build/CMakeLists.txt. Globbing 
for CMakeLists.txt finds too many subdirectories you don't really want to 
find. (And status/CMakeLists.txt will glob for test/CMakeLists.txt, 
perhaps.)

> I can understand existing library maintainers being worried about having 
> to support cmake in the future (or risk looking arcane).

Speaking for myself, I have no problem at all with supporting cmake at some 
point in the future, if necessary.