Hi Konst,

On Sun, 3 May 2020, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:

>
>
> 03.05.2020, 20:21, "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>:
> > Sibi Siddharthan <sibisiddharthan.github@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >>>  As you say, an extra instruction in INSTALL file to tell users to
> >>>  copy from contrib/cmake may workable, though it is unsatisfactory.
> >>>  But the other one will not simply work. If we need to have a new
> >>>  file with string "CMake" in its name at the top-level *anyway*, we
> >>>  should have the real thing to reduce one step from those who want to
> >>>  use it. Those who do not want to see "CMake" at the toplevel are
> >>>  already harmed either way, if is a dummy or if it is the real thing.
> >>
> >>  In your opinion, what would be the best way to communicate with users, there is
> >>  an optional CMake build system for git?
> >
> > You do not want to hear my opinion, as my priorities would be
> > different from yours ;-)
> >
> > Given that we all agreed that the only reason we contemplate use of
> > CMake in our project is strictly to help Windows build, i.e. due to
> > the same reason why we have contrib/buildsystems/, it is not one of
> > my goals to communicate with general users about optional CMake
> > support in the first place. It has lower priority than keeping the
> > project tree and the project history less cluttered.
> >
> > So my first preference would be an instruction somewhere in install
> > or readme that tells those who want to build for windows to copy
> > from (or perhaps update cmake to offer the "-f" option and tell it
> > to read from) contrib/cmake/CMakeLists.txt to the toplevel before
> > doing anything [*1*].
>
> FWIW, CMakeLists.txt doesn't have to be in the root of source tree in
> order to work. It can perfectly work from contrib/cmake after necessary
> changes in relative paths.

Would you have an example handy, or a link to an article describing this?

Ciao,
Johannes