see inline replies
On 2020-12-14 4:21 a.m., Dalai Felinto via Bf-committers wrote:
> Hi Ray,
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> The "it is scattered all over the place, and is fragile" is my personal
> opinion, and what motivated me to write the email.
>
> The propose to self-host was indeed from Ton.
Hi Ray,
Thanks for your reply.
The "it is scattered all over the place, and is fragile" is my personal
opinion, and what motivated me to write the email.
The propose to self-host was indeed from Ton. But I didn't want to add
the weight of his opinion on something that could first use some
cl
Seems like the reason has moved from "it's scattered all
over the place, that's a bit fragile" (technical reason,
which I will happily share/defend my views on) to
"because I want it for political reasons" (where not a
single technical argument will change your mind)
In the future it's probably be
Hi,
The reason is to protect software freedom in general. I don't like it
that for building Blender you are forced to use commercial sites
offering code. It would be different if we use established GNU approved
platforms.
https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html
https://ww
I'm unsure what this would achieve beyond making the lib update process more
frustrating than it already is?
The deps builder we have its singe purpose is to facilitate the building of our
SVN libs nothing more nothing less, its target audience is essentially 3 people
(the mac/linux/windows pla
Hi,
At the moment the source code to build the libraries required by Blender
is scattered everywhere:
* github
* sourceforge
* own projects sites
* archived pages on the web (e.g., http.debian.net for the bzip)
For the complete list see:
`build_files/build_environment/cmake/versions.cmake`
