Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
IMO We should deal with this as we do with any other submission. Someone needs to bring it up and we should review it and make a decision.
This is not like any other library because it impacts _all_ libraries and _all_ testers etc. And although the discussion on Cmake on this list is generally interesting, we should avoid making the same mistake as a few years ago. Last time when we were looking for a build-system (and finally decided on Jam), (I believe David Abrahams) had suggested a python-based build-system. This was unacceptable to many because it would mean boost had a dependency on python. Nevertheless of all those who objected, little had to work on/with the build system later on while the python-approach-supporters later on were stuck with much more work because of the criticism on the-python-approach. If we discuss features that we think are lacking in Cmake, we should also look at which build-system _does_ offer those features, which build-system would be a serious alternative. toon