Can we get rid of downloading cmake-binaries?

[roland...@gmail.com]

Hi,

I feel the downloading and unpacking is really unnecessary. It only clutters up the HD. I have about 30 projects that are built using CMake, and having only a single installation of CMake, available in the path, is enough for me.

I've attached a patch that makes the downloading of CMake configurable, with the default being not downloading. The CompileMojo assumes that downloading has already occurred in the GenerateMojo.

Would be great to see this in one of the next releases.

Thanks.

Roland

[Martin Weber]

Am Dienstag, 25. März 2014, 05:33:42 schrieb roland...@gmail.com:
> Hi,
>
> I feel the downloading and unpacking is really unnecessary. It only
> clutters up the HD. I have about 30 projects that are built using CMake,
> and having only a single installation of CMake, available in the path, is
> enough for me.

+1 from me.

But I feel, the Mojo paramter should be named useCMakeFromSystemPath.
And it lacks some documentation.

Cheers,
Martin


--
Cd wrttn wtht vwls s mch trsr.

[cowwoc]

I don't get this argument. The entire reason I wrote this plugin is to
automate the process of installing cmake if needed. If you're planning
to reference CMake off the PATH, why not just invoke exec:exec? :)

Gili

[Martin Weber]

The clear goal in that plugin.

[cowwoc]

What "clear" goal? I don't see one looking at
https://code.google.com/p/cmake-maven-project/

Gili

[roland...@gmail.com]

Well, at least we could make it optional, like I did in the posted patch. I can add some documentation, no problem.

I agree that your point of using exec:exec is valid. I just started using this plugin since I was not very familiar with the usage of CMake -- someone else in my company wrote it all and I was only using it from a Perl-script, but now that I know more about it, it would indeed be almost as simple to use exec:exec.
Still, I do feel that having the option to install and use CMake is useful, just not in my case.

Besides, if you want to supply the tool, then I think that you would also need to supply the tool(s) necessary when calling 'cmake --build', be it 'make', 'xcode' or 'jom' (the ones I'm using)... But this might be a whole other discussion.

Anyway, I will update the patch a bit and resend it. If you feel it has no place in the plugin, then that is up to you. I just think that having options isnice.

Roland

[cowwoc]

On 27/03/2014 8:23 AM, roland...@gmail.com wrote:
> Well, at least we could make it optional, like I did in the posted
> patch. I can add some documentation, no problem.
>
> I agree that your point of using exec:exec is valid. I just started
> using this plugin since I was not very familiar with the usage of
> CMake -- someone else in my company wrote it all and I was only using
> it from a Perl-script, but now that I know more about it, it would
> indeed be almost as simple to use exec:exec.
> Still, I do feel that having the option to install and use CMake is
> useful, just not in my case.

Ask yourself why.

If exec:exec does *exactly* what you're asking for, what is the benefit
of adding this feature to the plugin? Do we handle this use-case better
than exec:exec somehow?

> Besides, if you want to supply the tool, then I think that you would
> also need to supply the tool(s) necessary when calling 'cmake
> --build', be it 'make', 'xcode' or 'jom' (the ones I'm using)... But
> this might be a whole other discussion.

Agreed. I don't have any easy solution for this problem :)

Gili

[roland...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:44:00 PM UTC+1, cowwoc wrote:

On 27/03/2014 8:23 AM, roland...@gmail.com wrote:
> Well, at least we could make it optional, like I did in the posted
> patch. I can add some documentation, no problem.
>
> I agree that your point of using exec:exec is valid. I just started
> using this plugin since I was not very familiar with the usage of
> CMake -- someone else in my company wrote it all and I was only using
> it from a Perl-script, but now that I know more about it, it would
> indeed be almost as simple to use exec:exec.
> Still, I do feel that having the option to install and use CMake is
> useful, just not in my case.

Ask yourself why.

If exec:exec does *exactly* what you're asking for, what is the benefit
of adding this feature to the plugin? Do we handle this use-case better
than exec:exec somehow?

 
What I like about this plugin compared to exec:exec is that it is specific for CMake --> the parameters have names that make sense to others who have to read/work with it. exec:exec just has 'arguments', your plugin has 'generator', 'sourcePath', etc. This way people who are not so familiar with CMake at least know what argument is what.

[roland...@gmail.com]

Here's an updated patch. My previous patch changed the default behaviour to using CMake from the path. This patch doesn't change the plugin's original behaviour -- it has to be explicitly set.