Re: [Libmesh-devel] Still Really Dislike Automake

[Derek G. <fri...@gm...>]

Both of you claim to use these features - fine - I believe that you do...
but how many others?

However, it's obvious that you're both passionate about these... so I will
relent and agree that whatever build system we come up with has to have
these features.  Fine.

Can you agree with me that the current build system adds friction for
everyone that doesn't use these features?  I think you guys are so used to
how slow and laborious it is that you don't even realize how much better it
could be.

This happened the other day with John and I: I was complaining about how
slow "make install" is for libMesh.  John said "what do you mean, seems
fine to me"... after a bit of chatting it was clear that he was just so
used to it that it didn't phase him (he just types "make install" and let's
it do its thing)... but that doesn't mean that the inefficiency doesn't
exist!

Derek

On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 3:15 PM Roy Stogner <roy...@ic...>
wrote:

>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2018, Derek Gaston wrote:
>
> > I would rather fix the core development cycle - then backfill features
> based on priority (install > check > dist > out-of-tree, etc.)
>
> out-of-tree > install > check > dist.
>
> > completely chucked a sane development flow for the sake of a few
> features that are rarely actually used.
>
> By "rarely" do you mean "literally all the time, for years,
> indispensibly"?  Being able to easily build multiple configurations of
> the same working tree is incredibly useful.  The inability to do this
> as easily with MOOSE has cost in man-hours of both workarounds (when I
> maintain multiple trees to test different software stacks) and errors
> (when I don't have room to do so or time to go back-and-forth and one
> configuration or stack regresses).
> ---
> Roy
>