On 2018-04-17 15:56:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 5:13 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> > The half unmaintainedness of autoconf (no release in five years counts
> > as that imo), sure makes it look like a good idea to move on to cmake or
> > such at some point...
>
> I don't necessarily see that as a reason to move. If we're hitting
> bugs in autoconf that are causing problems, and we can't get them
> fixed in the upstream, that's a reason. But switching build systems
> won't be frictionless, so I'm not in favor of it unless there's a
> clear payoff.
I'd not advocate for this solely based on the age of autoconf. But the
separate windows buildsystem which makes it very hard to build
extensions separately is a good reason on its own. As is the fact that
recursive make as we're using it has significant issues. Both of those
would be avoided by using cmake or such.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
