On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 3:35 AM, Sergei Nikulov <sergey.nikulov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 2015-03-24 9:44 GMT+03:00 Alexander Williams <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> Hi Garrett, >> >> My current FFI-bindings (PicoLisp) contain a very simple script for users >> to build the nanomsg shared library. It's along the lines of: ./configure >> --enable-shared && make; >> >> Switching to CMake would require them to either install cmake or obtain a >> pre-built shared lib. I understand CMake is much better for developer >> sanity, but for end-users it's not. I'm not certain if switching would be a >> good idea if we burdened them with this additional requirement. >> >> In fact, the main reason I selected nanomsg was due to the ease and >> simplicity of building the shared library. CMake would cancel that primary >> requirement. >> >> Personally I don't like the idea. > > > I see no reasons to keep them both in project. > Of course it can be challenging to keep them in sync, but all doable with > some well defined rules. Wouldn't end users be more interested in deployed packages anyway? Of course that's likely to be a whole other can of works due to varied underlying dependencies, so hence the ability to build on own systems. > -- > Best Regards, > Sergei Nikulov