coapp-developers team mailing list archive

[Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 4:23 AM, John McNamee <jpm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Does anybody outside of Microsoft really like MSI?  Wouldn’t a package
> format based on ZIP archives be a better cultural fit for open source
> software?  I know MSI is the supported method for installing SxS
> assemblies.  For the sake of discussion, let’s assume that isn’t an issue.
> What other advantages do you see in MSI?  Are those advantages worth it?

IMO MSI is just an implementation 'detail'.

> (2) Shallow forks vs. upstream support
>
> I understand that shallow forks are needed to get started, but I hope the
> ultimate goal is getting CoApp adopted by as many upstream packages as
> possible.  I have a dream that some day, I'll be able to grab the latest
> code for random open source projects and build them on Windows as easily as
> on Unix.

There's no reason not to get upstream support.

> (3) CMake
>
> Have you looked at CMake (http://www.cmake.org)?  There are several
> cross-platform build systems out there, and none has emerged as a clear
> standard.  However, my observation is that CMake has gained the greatest
> acceptance.  Could CoApp leverage CMake?

IMO it's ok but not good.

Olaf