Hi all,
I understand both arguments and I agree with both bunt unfortunately we can't
maintain both environments so we will have to pick one.
I think that there is not much that we can do as PMC to pick 1 or the other
option. An open vote to the community is probably the best but still limited in
outreach and will still make some involved parts unhappy
There are many companies and projects that use NuttX with local code, sometimes
extensively patches NuttX build environment to suit their needs. We should
think about all the implications that tooling can have over their work since
they are in the end the user.
Best regards
Alin
-----Original Message-----
From: Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com>
Sent: den 23 maj 2023 16:29
To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [OT] Learning Makefiles
On 5/23/2023 7:32 AM, Nathan Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 8:07 AM Tomek CEDRO<to...@cedro.info> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 9:31 AM Sebastien Lorquet wrote:
>>> Hello Tomek,
>>> Whatever is decided, the mere fact of wanting to make a decision on
>>> this point will lead to more split.
>>> either from people that want cmake
>>> or from people who dont.
>>> this is an intrinsically bad decision Sebastien
>> I am afraid of that, trying to help to avoid that! :-(
>>
>> I know each group has its points.
>>
>> Maybe we should just see how it works out in practice?
>
> I very much *don't* want to cause a split in the community!!!
>
> We're only having a *discussion* and comparing/contrasting. We're not
> moving ahead and making any huge changes yet. I think it is a good
> thing for everyone to say their thoughts and explain pros/cons.
>
> If we try it in practice, we will definitely find out if it makes life
> better, or worse. Unfortunately that would require doing all the work
> (some is already done in PRs 3704 and 6718 but will need attention)
> and maintaining two parallel build systems for a while. Will people
> want to volunteer to do that if all the work might be thrown away?
> Maybe, maybe not. I suppose it depends on how strongly people feel
> about CMake.
>
> So I think, first, we should make a nice coherent list of pros/cons.
>
> I'm okay with tracking pros/cons in a GitHub issue instead of CWIKI.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
I see one of primary responsibility of the PMC is to support the needs a
desires of the NuttX community. For things like tools, the pros and
cons are not nearly as important. The easiest way to find out the will
of the community is simply to ask, perhaps with a non-binding community
vote.
On a different note, we have not talked about what level of testing a
new build system should be held to. I think that level should be quite
high. I don't think we should break any builds, even on an initial
merge. Satisfactory testing should address:
* All build modes: FLAT, PROTECTED, KERNEL (including the kernel mode
file system)
* All supported build platforms: Linux, BSD, MacOS, Windows: Cygwin,
MYSYS, native. etc. None of those should be broken.
