Thank you Paul, very well written, and please be assured that we are not looking into this as a cisco project and we are happy to se non-cisco people joining and contributing.
Point here is that cmake story was discussed in the community, people had enough time to comment, and all comments were very positive. Now suddenly somebody shows on the mailing list few months ago throwing dirt without many arguments and advising that we move back. I'm absolutely not interested in cmake vs autotools vs. xxxx kind of wars. It is just tool which help us to do the work and so far i did't hear about any issue people had with cmake to get work done. Yes, cross-compile needs to be implemented, not big deal but honestly very low on my priority list. Will be happy to review and merge if somebody want's to do it. Beside that it is annoying is that persons who have zero track record in this project contributions feel comfortable to teach people who contribute on the daily basis what is good for them. -- Damjan > On 19 Dec 2018, at 18:39, Paul Vinciguerra <pvi...@vinciconsulting.com> wrote: > > Hi Andrew. > > As a non-cisco observer to group, I respectfully disagree. I'm sure the old > code is still available in the repo for your use, should you wish to use it. > You however took the position that the community here needs to take their > resources and use them to maintain a solution that you favor. At least, > that's how I saw it. > > If you read the links you posted, > "Please don't argue unceasingly for your preferred course of action when a > decision for some other course has already been made. That tends to block the > activity's progress." > > Dave and Damian offered you direction in-line with the direction that they > have taken in an effort to help you meet your objectives. I don't think it's > reasonable to tell others that they need to commit their valuable resources > to maintain your preference. Look, I have change-sets that weren't accepted, > I understand it, but they still exist in the repo and I cherry-pick them, so > I can meet my objectives. > > I often share your "feeling" that this is really a "cisco" project. But, > being objective for a moment, all those cisco emails committing the > change-sets day-in and day-out are individuals who have taken on the > responsibility at the end of the day to ensure that the code continues to > work. While I don't speak for the community, I'm pretty sure no one would > object to you resurrecting and maintaining your toolset of choice. > > Can we please let this thread die, It's not a productive use of anyone's time. > > Paul > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:05 PM Andrew Pinski <pins...@gmail.com > <mailto:pins...@gmail.com>> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 12:00 PM Damjan Marion <dmar...@me.com > <mailto:dmar...@me.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 19 Dec 2018, at 17:46, Andrew Pinski <pins...@gmail.com > > > <mailto:pins...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 11:29 AM Dave Barach (dbarach) > > > <dbar...@cisco.com <mailto:dbar...@cisco.com>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Please give the instructions at > > >> https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/manual/cmake-toolchains.7.html#cross-compiling > > >> > > >> <https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/manual/cmake-toolchains.7.html#cross-compiling> > > >> a try and let us know what happens. > > > > > > Wow. So much harder to do than what autoconf provides. I think going > > > to cmake is a mistake and that it needs to be reverted. Again the > > > only reason why VPP moved was for faster compiling by what a few > > > minutes but provide a messy interface to use instead. I guess VPP > > > does not care about easy of compiling but would rather have faster > > > compiling. > > > > Over my dead body :) > > This attitute does not belong in Open source projects. It is exactly > the reason why Linus is doing Hugs now and why the GNU project has its > own kind communication guides: > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html > <https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html> > > I am explaining why techincally it is a mistake and you basically just > did a bully method. This is not acceptable. Maybe inside Cisco it is > but in open source world it is not. > > Thanks, > Andrew Pinski > > > > > -- > > Damjan > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#11705): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/11705 > <https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/11705> > Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/28800506/1594641 > <https://lists.fd.io/mt/28800506/1594641> > Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev%2bow...@lists.fd.io> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub > <https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub> [pvi...@vinciconsulting.com > <mailto:pvi...@vinciconsulting.com>] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#11712): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/11712 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/28800506/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
