[RFC libdrm 0/2] Replace the build system with meson

[Dylan Baker]

Quoting Jani Nikula (2017-03-22 01:24:19)
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2017, Dylan Baker <dylan at pnwbakers.com> wrote:
> > Quoting Jani Nikula (2017-03-21 07:44:55)
> >> How does meson handle build file backwards compatibility between meson
> >> versions? I don't intend to flame, but I've found for some reason many
> >> python projects don't seem to take this very seriously. Either having
> >> conditionals in build files to support building with several meson
> >> versions or always requiring the latest and greatest version would be
> >> rather annoying.
> >
> > Meson makes backwards compatible changes, and the version can be
> > queried using `meson.version()`, which works using meson's version
> > comparison mechanism. I would say this about meson, it's not a 'python
> > project', it's 'a project written in python',
> 
> This is what I meant above, although I clearly didn't write it that way.

I don't think I was exactly clear in what I said either, I would describe SCons
as a "python project", and meson as a "project written in python", since SCons
is python and has some of the warts that make backwards compatibility in python
projects hard (changes that work in the majority case break in some niche use
cases), where meson has a parser/generator written in python.

> > and they've taken great pains to not expose python in meson, and
> > reserve the right to reimplement in a different language if python
> > becomes an issue.
> 
> Right. That helps avoid many of the issues e.g. Sphinx has with the
> configuration files being pure python.

Yes, sphinx's configuration files are awful for just that reason.

Dylan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20170322/f4ec7f10/attachment.sig>