Re: Proposal for Gnome Goal (was Re: Switching from Autotools to CMake for core evolution products)

[Tristan Van Berkom <tristan vanberkom codethink co uk>]

On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 08:39 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 10:04 +0100, Philip Withnall wrote:
> > I don’t think we’ve ported enough modules as testbeds yet. Meson is
> > too new
> > to jump into encouraging everyone to port GNOME modules en-masse.
> >
> > Maybe the goal could be proposed in 6 months once Meson has matured
> > a
> > bit
> > more and more modules have dogfooded it?
>
> Yeah. I've been looking at Meson recently and it looks really nice,
> but
> right now not much is using it in JHBuild, just GStreamer and, as of
> yesterday, libhttpseverywhere. Let's port a couple more modules and
> give it some months before we decide to recommend it project-wide.
> This
> also gives Meson some more time to mature.

I'm not familiar with Meson myself but have had to go through numerous
headaches dealing with CMake ported projects which tended to build well
on the maintainers computer but not on mine, or not withstand to a
cross compile properly. CMake (and it's userbase) is/are starting to be
mature and these problems are fewer and further between.

I would caution against using only JHBuild as a metric for Meson's
maturity. Rather I would recommend starting at the lower end of the
stack, say try to port glib/GTK+ over to use Meson in a wip branch, and
then see how that withstands a cross compile to arm in a wip branch
against Yocto poky master.

If that works well I would say it's pretty much ready.

Cheers,
    -Tristan

> At any rate, I have experience with working on CMake for WebKitGTK+,
> and my initial impression of meson relative to CMake is highly
> positive.
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list