[Olympus developers 29]: Re: cmucltk changes

[TK Harris]

A test framework doesn't help what I see are the real problems with (1) 
and (2), which are that developers need to develop in multiple 
environments regardless of whether the code changes involve os 
dependencies. This is already a problem for the sphinxes. As David says, 
"Every time I switch to Windows an angel dies". Even if an angel doesn't 
die, he's wasting his time. More often, I'm guessing that the build just 
gets broken, as happened recently with Alex's changes.

(1) If we want to keep VS build stuff, in order to do any file structure 
changes (including simply adding a file) developers will need to have 
windows, visual studio, and linux (or cygwin).
(2) This option is even worse. If we want to use binaries, _any_ change 
will require the developer to compile in windows and linux.

Perhaps this is a good test case for a forth option: cmake or its ilk.

-Thomas

Benjamin Frisch wrote:
> I am not in favor of introducing a Cygwin dependency as well; however,
> I understood the original message to imply that the rebuilt binaries
> do not require Cygwin to run.  If the former is true I am ok with a VS
> Windows build being pushed off until 2.3; however, I think 1 is ideal
> if Cygwin/Unix support for the cmulmtk can be retained along with VS
> build support with relative ease in time for 2.2.  (Perhaps, we need a
> test framework for this?)
>
> Ben
>
> On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Antoine Raux <antoine at cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>   
>> Until we have a Linux version of Olympus, I'm in favor of not introducing a
>> Cygwin dependency, so I prefer solution 1), although I don't know how hard
>> that would be...
>>
>>  antoine
>>
>>  TK Harris wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Recent changes have broken the Visual Studio build of the cmucltk, which
>>>       
>> Olympus depends on. The stable 2.1 branch of Olympus is pegged to an older
>> version of the toolkit, so for now only the trunk is affected. I see that
>> Alex has improved the cygwin build so that it's well integrated with the
>> linux builds, and yet builds native Windows executables, also it looks like
>> there are binaries checked in.
>>     
>>> We can either
>>> 1) fix the VS build
>>> 2) just use checked-in executables
>>> 3) require cygwin for an Olympus build
>>>
>>> I don't really like any of these options; they each have some negatives.
>>>       
>> I'm open to suggestions.
>>     
>>> -Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>     
>
>