Re: WIP: About CMake v2
От | Christian Convey |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPfS4Zx-NtkmN3_eE0UJW9r_4qFjx9GgEzB5=4sKnimhaM5tAg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP: About CMake v2 (Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP: About CMake v2
Re: WIP: About CMake v2 |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tom, >> I ask because I'm curious if/how someone in Yury's situation could >> predict which minimum version of CMake must be supported in order for >> his patch to be accepted. (And if he accepts my offer to pitch in, >> I'll actually need that particular detail.) > > well I personally think the level to meet would be that all the systems > on the buildfarm that can build -HEAD at the time the patch is proposed > for a commit should be able to build using the new system with whatever > cmake version is available in those by default (if it is at all). I see. In other projects I've worked on, the configuration of a build farm has been driven by some list of platforms that were considered important to support. Is that the case here as well? I.e., is the build-farm population just a convenient proxy for some other source of information regarding what platforms are important? Apologies if my questions are so basic that I can find the answers elsewhere. I'll happily follow any RTFM links. Thanks again, Christian
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: