Re: Some random thoughs and questions on the future of GNUstep

[Riccardo]

Hey,

On Saturday, September 30, 2006, at 04:45 PM, Nikolaus Waxweiler wrote:

> In conclusion, I think that CMake might become a viable alternative to
> GNUstep Make. Does anyone beg to differ? Better alternatives? Keep
> GNUstep Make? I see that the SideStep people use Autotools and a
> customized jam called gsjam...

I might be old-fashioned, but I'd like to keep make. Make is proven on 
unix and that platform remains after all our main target. On windows we 
need gcc anyway...
For a unix person, make is a reasonable way to work with and it is easy 
to package since people have experience with it. I don't see a big need 
for integration in other development environments in that "clunky" way 
of yet-another meta-tool, since we should have our own IDEs anyway. 
FUrthermore the integration with say ProjectCenter is yet another good 
thing of make. I dislike what apple did with the macosx transition of 
projectbuilder: the removal of make.

Thus I am not saying that cmake is crap, but that make is more apt to 
us. On the other side some issues you stir up against gnustep-make are 
really present: maintaineance! Also the current usage pf p2link causes 
possible troubles when making and installing with "sudo".

Cheers,
  Riccardo.