Den tis 11 juni 2024 kl 04:29 skrev Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com >:
> [...] It would be nice to hear > from binary packagers. Will they overwhelmingly say "yes please! It's > about time!" Or will they say, "Please don't, it would create too much > headache and I couldn't go on providing packages because of it." > I think this was a good suggestion but I don't think anyone picked up on this. I'm suggesting to send a directed e-mail to the package maintainers for a handful of distributions asking for their feedback and also experience from other projects switching build system (do's and dont's). I have picked a few from our Binary packages page and tried to figure out the contact information to the maintainers. At the moment I have included Alpine Linux, Debian, Fedora, Arch Linux, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Homebrew (MacOS) and MacPorts and I'm thinking about sending something like the following: [[[ Dear package maintainer, We have reason to believe you are maintaining the Apache Subversion package for a package management system. If this is not the case, please ignore this e-mail and accept our appologies. Apache Subversion currently uses an Autoconf based build system on Unix-like operating systems and a homegrown system to create Visual Studio solutions on Windows. We consider switching to CMake for a unified build system. We will probably do this in a multi step process where we will support both Autoconf and CMake for a while before deprecating the old Autoconf build system. (The changes will probably conincide with new minor releases, ie 1.15, 1.16 etc. meaning a timeline of at least a few years). There is currently a functional prototype of the CMake build system in the cmake branch (see https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/cmake/). It is not yet feature complete but builds on Linux, MacOS, FreeBSD and Windows. Do you a specific preference regarding the change (does it affect your ability to continue providing the Subversion package, do you have any timing requirements etc.)? Do you have experience from other projects switching to CMake (dos and don'ts) that can improve our switch? Please reply to dev@subversion.apache.org. ]]] Your thoughts on sending an e-mail like this? Kind regards, Daniel
