All very good points. I really don't care how this gets changed, just as long as I can select by project name and not its build directory. If that involves first selecting the project and then selecting its build directory in a second drop-down box, that's fine too.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Eric Noulard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eric.noulard@gmail.com">eric.noulard@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
2009/4/5 Robert Dailey <<a href="mailto:rcdailey@gmail.com">rcdailey@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">> I noticed that in the cmake-gui application (Windows),<br>
<br>
</div>The behavior is the same on Linux.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> the drop-down box is<br>
> on the binary directory edit field and not the source directory field. This<br>
> seems backwards to me. Was this decision arbitrary or by design?<br>
<br>
</div>I don't know the reason, but I may say that:<br>
<br>
1) If you choose the binary dir you'll automatically get<br>
the corresponding source tree, because the build knows it's<br>
source tree (by design).<br>
<br>
2) If you choose a source tree you may have to chose between several<br>
binary trees because in fact you have a 1 -- n relationship<br>
between a source tree (the 1) and possibly many binary trees (the n)<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> If the latter, why? Would it be possible to move the history listing to the source<br>
> directory edit field?<br>
<br>
</div>I think it would be interesting but then cmake-gui may not be able to<br>
"automatically" chose the corresponding build tree because there may<br>
be more than one.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> The reason why I bring this up is because the binary output directory may<br>
> not always make it very obvious as to which source directory you are<br>
> building.<br>
<br>
</div>However once you selected the binary tree you precisely know (with no<br>
possible error)<br>
the corresponding source tree.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> It seems like the user would be more interested in knowing the<br>
> history of source trees they have built instead of where those binaries were<br>
> placed, which does not necessarily have to be a node within the source tree.<br>
<br>
</div>If I were about to implement the feature:<br>
<br>
- I would even say that I'll be more interested by a project name<br>
than a pathname<br>
(I may check the path after the project has been selected)<br>
<br>
- the multiple build tree problem should be solved by some pop-up<br>
and or message box<br>
telling that there exist more than one build tree corresponding<br>
to the source tree/project.<br>
<br>
My 2 cents.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Erk<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>