[Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] drop autotools

[Dylan Baker]

Quoting Jason Ekstrand (2018-12-19 08:07:23)
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 2:51 AM Juan A. Suarez Romero <jasuarez at igalia.com>
> wrote:
> 
>     On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 19:51 +0100, Bas Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>     > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:33 PM Juan A. Suarez Romero
>     > <jasuarez at igalia.com> wrote:
>     > > On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 10:21 +0000, Eric Engestrom wrote:
>     > > > Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com>
>     > > > Cc: Andres Gomez <agomez at igalia.com>
>     > > > Cc: Juan A. Suarez Romero <jasuarez at igalia.com>
>     > > > Cc: Dylan Baker <dylan at pnwbakers.com>
>     > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom at intel.com>
>     > > > ---
>     > > > This patch depends on the releasing procedure in docs/releasing.html
>     to
>     > > > be updated to not rely on autotools anymore.
>     > > >
>     > > > I think our release managers (cc'ed) should work together and figure
>     out
>     > > > the procedure they want to go by; only once that's done can we delete
>     > > > these 200+ files and 14k+ lines :)
>     > >
>     > > I'll let others to talk. But my preference would be to land this for
>     next 19.0
>     > > branchpoint, just a couple of days before the branchpoint, so 19.0.x
>     releases
>     > > get rid of autotools.
>     > >
>     > > This way we have time to fix any remaining issue, and make like easier
>     for those
>     > > in charge of 18.3.x releases, which I think should support autotools
>     until the
>     > > end of its life.
>     >
>     > Can I suggest the inverse, pushing this long before any branchpoint?
>     >
>     > As with any migration, users only start using when you force them too,
>     > and that means a bunch of non-working usecases are going to be
>     > detected once this patch is pushed and some more people are forced to
>     > it. Sure, the last call discussion served to tease some of these out,
>     > but I expect even more will turn up if you submit this.
>     >
> 
>     The bad part is that this make life more complex for the person in charge
>     of the
>     stable release, because it means that any patch that touches the build
>     system
>     will only touch the meson, but not the autotools, which means either the
>     original author or the release manager should fix the part of the autotools
>     in
>     order to avoid breaking it.
> 
> 
> How common is it to have build system patches back-ported to stable?  I
> genuinely don't know but I would suspect it's not all that frequent of a thing.

For meson it happens fairly regularly, it happens for android as well, for Scons
and autotools it does happen but not often. It's starting to happen now more
than it did before as there are at least a couple of drivers where the
developer(s) all use meson primarily, and only touch test autotools at best. I
suspect that will get worse as time goes by.

Dylan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/attachments/20181219/b892178c/attachment.sig>