Re: notmuch on w32

[David Bremner <david@tethera.net>]

Claudio Bley <claudio.bley@googlemail.com> writes:

> I wanted to use notmuch on MS Windows and thus have ported the code to
> be able to compile with MinGW and MSYS using the GNU autotools on that
> platform.

Do you really need autotools, or was it just the easiest path to get
things working on w32?  

> Now, I'm in the process of streamlining the patches.
>
> As a first prerequisite I integrated gnulib as a git submodule and
> added the Makefile.am and configure.ac stuff.

I'm not really in favour of embedding gnulib (or any other library) in
the notmuch source tree, using submodules or otherwise. I understand the
gnulib authors intend it to be embedded, but the idea of staticly
linking to something whose source tree is 87M gives me pause.  

At least on debian gnulib is packaged as a seperate library; I don't
know how usable it is in that configuration.

I wouldn't say that we are minimalist, but we are making an effort to
keep the dependencies as small as possible, so even setting aside the
question of embedding, the cost/benefit ratio of this new proposed
dependency would have to be discussed.

> My question is: would it hurt your feelings if I'd rip off the old
> build system completely and substitute it with an autotools build?

We have so far avoided autotools on purpose.  For a previous discussion
on build systems, see

    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.mail.notmuch.general/700

(and the rest of the thread).

I don't want to sound too discouraging, but my initial impression is
that your approach sounds fairly intrusive for a benefit (w32
compatibility) that is not a huge motivator for me. 

Speaking only for myself,

d

P.S. in case it isn't completely obvious, I'm only discussing what's
suitable for inclusion upstream.