Cyrus Imap and Automake

[Bron Gondwana]

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 06:50:46PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 17:45, Jeroen van Meeuwen (Kolab Systems)
> <vanmeeuwen at kolabsys.com> wrote:
> > Ondřej Surý wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 17:59, Jeroen van Meeuwen (Kolab Systems)
> >>
> >> <vanmeeuwen at kolabsys.com> wrote:
> >> > Thomas Jarosch wrote:
> >> >> Hi Дилян,
> >> >>
> >> >> here's some feedback about your build system question.
> >> >> Note: I'm not one of the cyrus core developers.
> >> >>
> >> >> > if I rewrite the build system of Cyrus imap 2.4(.10) to use Automake
> >> >> > to generate the Makefile.in-files, will the patch be accepted in
> >> >> > reasonable time in git/master?
> >> >>
> >> >> Have you considered alternatives to GNU Autotools?
> >> >>
> >> >> We have experience with GNU Autotools in our company projects as well as
> >> >> open source projects for several years now.
> >> >>
> >> >> We have found that it has several shortcomings:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Autotools version conflicts
> >> >>
> >> >> You can compile a released source package without any Autotools on your
> >> >> system. But as soon as you
> >> >>
> >> >> a) want to develop
> >> >> b) want to install a patch which modifies the build system (like a new
> >> >> path to a library, something that adds a new file,...). This is often
> >> >> happens as part of packaging for .rpm or .deb.
> >> >>
> >> >> you need Autotools on your machine. If the Autotools version on your
> >> >> machine and the one used to build the release are not compatible you
> >> >> can't build.
> >> >>
> >> >> Installing a different Autotools version on a given distribution without
> >> >> breaking something or fixing a huge list of dependency problems is
> >> >> nearly impossible. I have experience with this...
> >> >
> >> > I have quite the experience with .rpm and .deb building myself as well,
> >> > and while I agree autotools *can* be problematic at times, I recon the
> >> > Linux distributions are not the biggest of problems - the culprit, I
> >> > think, is with the number of custom / site-specific builds out there,
> >> > ranging from Sun Solaris to FreeBSD and who knows what versions of
> >> > autotools are on these systems.
> >>
> >> With my fancy debian maintainer hat on - I agree, we learnt how to cope
> >> with different versions of autotools, that's the minor thing.
> >>
> >> I personally I would love to have cyrus projects automakized. It's much
> >> easy to mangle :).
> >>
> >
> > Between the two of us, Debian and Fedora maintainers, are we both saying "yes
> > please, no objections"?
> 
> I am even saying: "Yes, please, no objections. I will send patches."

Excellent, then it will be committed!