CMake: misc fixes, using new infra modules

[redtide]

Draft: requires cycfi/infra#19, then change the infra submodule branch to master.
Testing other changes...

[redtide]

@djowel I'm also working on an Elements PR and I see we have infra included 2 times there: by both Elements and Artist; can we remove the Elements submodule and use the Artist one?

[djowel]

@djowel I'm also working on an Elements PR and I see we have infra included 2 times there: by both Elements and Artist; can we remove the Elements submodule and use the Artist one?

Ah makes sense!

[djowel]

@redtide I think we should first target a feature branch and then merge to develop once stable. There are clients expecting a stable develop branch.

[redtide]

Looking at Elements in particular (but also a bit in Artist) after Infra changes there are a lot of things to simplify and also to fix, it's quite a mess (duplicate scripts, different variable names and other little things around), so from my POV it's not about a feature but adapt and fix.

Making a middle way change it's difficult to me, because there are cascading changes to apply that impacts Artist which in turn impacts to Elements, I have no idea how to make this without a straightforward, direct change.

In brief it's not "something nice to have" but "something required". OTOH who is going to test a feature branch which has nothing new to see? I'm not even changing a line of c++ code, it's all about CMake.

[djowel]

Making a middle way change it's difficult to me, because there are cascading changes to apply that impacts Artist which in turn impacts to Elements, I have no idea how to make this without a straightforward, direct change.

Feature branches are also tested, so I do not know what you mean. I think we are not in the same page. I always test on feature branches for potentially large changes, in multiple repositories. I just make feature branches on all relevant repositories and point each to its dependencies.

In brief it's not "something nice to have" but "something required". OTOH who is going to test a feature branch which has nothing new to see? I'm not even changing a line of c++ code, it's all about CMake.

You cannot guarantee that. CMake changes can also cause disruption. Let's do it in a feature branch please. And please let's not "fix" what is not broken. I am OK for an incremental upgrade, but not for a wholesale change.

No argument, please ;-)

[djowel]

feature branch which has nothing new to see

The binaries. Those are not vetted yet.