[CMake] CMakeModules repository at GitHub?

[Alan W. Irwin]

On 2013-03-29 14:31-0400 Bill Hoffman wrote:

> On 3/29/2013 11:27 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>> Great, I'm all for that, but let's set up "no new find modules added
>> to CMake repo"
>> once for all, and force this approach.
>> Otherwise, reality will continue to diverge from the plans.
> If you read carefully,, that is not exactly what we want to do or even what 
> Dave is proposing.   The process should be:
>
> 1. try to upstream cmake config files to the project you are using
> 2. if there is not already a cmake module and you need to find a version of 
> the software that does not or never will have upstream config files, then 
> contribute that to CMake.
>
> We don't want a no-new module ban.  We just want to change the process a bit. 
> If a module is needed, useful, and general, it should go in CMake.
>

Hi Bill:

This may have been covered in this thread already, but I am interested
in your take on the following questions.  Why no downstream (i.e.,
associated with CMake) config files if upstream won't take them?  For
the downstream case, are find modules considered to be a better
solution than config files, and if so why?

Alan
__________________________
Alan W. Irwin

Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy,
University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca).

Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state
implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time
Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting
software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project
(unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net);
and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net).
__________________________

Linux-powered Science
__________________________