[CMake] Documentation strategy

[Robert J. Hansen]

> I am; note the subject line.

That is not enough to make me talk about it.  My concern is not what  
you call a 'documentation strategy'.  I think that's tail chasing,  
mostly.  My concern is what I see as a tendency towards overbroad  
generalizations on your part.

> It's long and run-on but properly constructed.  Is English not your
> 1st language?  Note the implicit "then," i.e. "[then] there are lotsa
> extra barriers."

When told that one is being unclear, it's usually better make things  
clear than to argue you're being perfectly clear.  Also, run-on  
sentence construction is considered a grammatical error, which means  
that it's not properly constructed.

>> >>> The projects that see CMake as a slam dunk, are the ones that  
>> did an
>> >>> Autoconf build for the Unix stuff, and also had to maintain some
>> >>> horrible hand rolled Visual Studio build, typically with .BAT  
>> files.
>
> No, when you are definitely planning to port to Windows, and picking
> tools on that basis, you are not doing a Unix-only project anymore.
> You are at the planning stage of a cross-platform project.

Please compare what you said, which I said was overly broad, with  
what you are now saying, which is substantially different.

I have said what I intended to say, and for that reason I think I'm  
finished here.  Please stop being overly broad; it just undercuts  
what you're trying to argue.

--
Robert J. Hansen <rjh at sixdemonbag.org>

"Most people are never thought about after they're gone.  'I wonder
where Rob got the plutonium?' is better than most get." -- Phil Munson