On 27/10/2021 15.18, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 12:48 Matthew Woehlke via SG15 <sg15_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>> This feels a lot like a rehash of P1313. I would encourage taking a look
>> at CPS¹ for an idea what sort of information CMake wants.
>>
>
> I think the difference here is that I'm trying to motivate a paper on the
> requirements first, instead of coming up with the specification itself
> right now.
>
> It's very well possible that CPS will address all those requirements, it's
> possible that this would motivate changes to CPS so it addresses any extra
> requirements we gather.
>
> But my point is mainly that I don't think we have consensus on what are all
> the requirements that need to be addressed by such specification right now.

Sure. But *my* point is that CPS is a "lessons learned" specification.
Admittedly, one slanted toward CMake, but even so, it may be worth
looking at what sort of information CPS tries to provide as a starting
point.

-- 
Matthew