On 1/9/2014 11:59, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> IMHO there is no need to provide binaries for EVERY version of MSVC that
> could be used, but only for the most "popular".
That's the problem, actually. If I had the last three versions of VS
Professional, or even the last *two*, I'd call that good enough and
done. It's the gap that makes me think I shouldn't do this.
I could talk myself into building VS2013-only packages. But, there's an
excellent chance my company won't be upgrading to VS.next, which puts us
back in the same hand-basket in a year or two.
If this is going to happen, it should probably be done by someone who
actually cares that these packages exist, and has the tools, skill and
will to create them. My toolkit is incomplete, and my will is weak.
> Or even only the ones you
> feel like providing. E. g. MSVC2010 32-bit, MVSC2012 32-bit and MSVC2013 32
> and 64-bit. Or even less than that.
Are you volunteering to build VC++ binary packages? :)
All of this is resting on the premise that asking end users of MySQL++
on Windows[*] to install [SCons+Python]/CMake is too much to ask.
That's also a matter of shades of gray, rather than black/white. Some
people will tolerate it, some won't. I don't know how big the latter
group is, or what set of binaries would bring them back into the camp.
[*] I'm assuming that "apt-get install cmake" or "brew install scons" is
no real burden for the *ix folk.