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

Subject: Re: [boost] [EXTERNAL] Request for a "Policy Review"regarding 'CMakeLists.txt'
From: Paul Fultz II (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-20 11:16:12

> On May 20, 2016, at 8:25 AM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> 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.)

Globbing for ‘libs/*/CMakeLists.txt` will only find the top-level cmake files. Also, globbing in cmake(just like unix) is not recursive(although cmake has an option to make it recursive).