Re: [PATCH 0/9] configurator: Support for Windows and MSVC

David Gibson <[email protected]> Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:25:24 +1000
Newsgroups	org.ozlabs.lists.ccan
Message-ID	<20160920122524.GE20488@umbus>
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:21:25AM -0600, Kevin Locke wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to review these patches, especially for a
> platform that you don't have a strong stake in.  I really appreciate it.
> 
> On 09/19/2016 10:48 PM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 06:51:57PM -0600, Kevin Locke wrote:
> > > This patch series adds support for building configurator with Microsoft
> > > Visual C++ and running it on Windows.  The motivation is to add
> > > sufficient support for Windows to allow using header-only modules
> > > with minimal hassle.  For me, this patch series is sufficient, so I
> > > don't have any further plans for changes to other files or the build
> > > system at the moment.
> > 
> > First, thanks for this.  ccan isn't supposed to be platform specific,
> > but it kind of is at the moment, simply because most of the
> > contributions have been from Linux developers.  I'm really happy to
> > see some work to make it useful on different platforms.
> > 
> > Second, because I'm not and have never been a Windows dev, my ability
> > to review these is limited - so I'm inclined to apply anything that
> > doesn't break builds on Linux / POSIX.
> > 
> > Third, because most of the main ccan contributors are not Windows
> > devs, I'm a bit worried about bitrot.  If you can think of any way of
> > making some kind of automated smoke test form builds on Windows, that
> > would be terrific.  Otherwise, I guess we'll just hope for the best.
> 
> I think that's a very legitimate concern.  I'm not a frequent Windows
> developer myself, but had a need for a current project.  I've tried to
> minimize the amount of Windows-specific code, with good results I think, but
> that's obviously not much of a guarantee that it won't rot or subtly break
> on Windows going forward.
> 
> I've seen appveyor.com used quite often for Windows CI, and it is free for
> FOSS projects.  I'd be happy to work up some basic smoke tests if it seems
> like that might be useful and not too much of a maintenance burden.  Let me
> know what you think.

Sounds good to me.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

_______________________________________________
ccan mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/ccan
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 819 B)