> Yes, but this project has rules that were set by Greg. People have limited resources and the NuttX community is not numerous. The question is what is more valuable for the project - adding functionality supported only by cmake, hoping someone will add support for make later, or not adding any functionality at all? Is it against INVIOLABLES? Probably yes. Is it better for the project? Probably yes. Do we have the resources to act differently? Probably not.
> This situation would not have happened if people had not introduced > cmake in the first place Nobody is forcing anyone to use cmake. Nobody is forcing anyone to use cmake-dependent features. You want cmake functionality in make but the previous contributor didn't add it for some reason - feel free to add it, but don't force others to do your work for you. Without cmake, there would be no nrf53, nrf91, dual core h7 and many others that will soon appear due to easier integration with external projects and easy build for multiple images. ...Or they won't, if the integration with make takes so much time and irritation that contributors give up PRs to the upstream. pt., 25 sie 2023 o 12:35 Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> napisał(a): > Hi, > > Le 25/08/2023 à 11:48, raiden00pl a écrit : > > Forcing people using cmake to support make is the worst thing that can > > happen. > > Open source is voluntary, any contribution is voluntary, any form of > > forcing > > others to do anything is unacceptable. > > Modifying both systems will be good practice (and an act of kindness), > but > > only > > if the contributor wants it. In other cases, a community interested in a > > particular > > build system should take care of it. > > Yes, but this project has rules that were set by Greg. > > This situation would not have happened if people had not introduced > cmake in the first place > > Sebastien > >
