[CMake-Promote] Autoconf foot dragging

[Brandon Van Every]

I'm having a very frustrating conversation with the author of Chicken
Scheme:

> > > What objective metrics does the CMake build have to fulfill?
> >
> > Popularity is one important point. The CMake build is fine. It's great.
I love it.
> > I don't love CMake bugs, though. I WANT CHICKEN TO BE AVAILABLE TO AS
MANY USERS AS
> > POSSIBLE. Period. I don't want to make anybody learn something new, if
he/she just
> > wants to get chicken running.
>
> I don't understand why you think a person energetic enough to even bother
with Chicken, is lazy
> enough that they won't bother with CMake.  I also wonder what objective
adoption metrics it would
> take to dissuade you of this religion.

Is there a way that we can prove to scared project leads that they're not
going to lose a bunch of users by dumping Autoconf?  Do we have any
objective evidence from projects that have made or are making the leap?

I mean, this "people won't use CMake because it's not Autoconf" stuff is
driving me NUTS.  I am utterly irritated to see community energy split
between 2 build systems, when I have provided a feature complete system that
works on all platforms, it has been field tested for months, it is all but
bug free, and the Autoconf build only handles the Unix-y systems.  The
Chicken author is far more concerned about popularity than build maintenance
burdens, probably because both builds are stable right now and he's not
doing any work on either of them.

How can we put an end to this kind of foot dragging?


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake-promote/attachments/20070514/99b4dda8/attachment.html