On Jan 4, 2008 3:09 PM, Miguel A. Figueroa-Villanueva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think this carries the bias you present. The idea is not to > force the user to have all packages installed if they are optional. > The module should only fail if a *required* package is not found. If > the SDL module was poorly designed in that sense, then it needs some > enhancements.
Indeed the Chicken SDL package did need such enhancements. But they were not performed, because in the real world it's extra implementation labor to chase the changing components around. As you say, the problem is solvable in principle. In practice, whether it gets solved depends on the level of energy of the FindOSG maintainer. In this thread we've heard that he feels a bit, ah, overwhelmed by the scope of OSG, so I have my doubts that a monolithic FindOSG is going to function correctly over time. Perhaps the answer is for you and others to join forces with him so that it isn't 1 person being overwhelmed by the gruntwork. Chicken SDL packaging didn't improve much because the people who did tend to use it were Linuxers, and nobody wanted to be saddled with sole responsibility for the needed improvements. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list [email protected] http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
