> > > > currently to link Midas to project one has to do several steps ...
> > > this information is incorrect. please read https://daq00.triumf.ca/elog-midas/Midas/2258
> > 
> > I admit that i did not see your post about targets import
> > via `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`
> > before implementing changes to cmake scripts.
> >
> > But in this respect the way you propose to do it via `include` should still work.
> >
> 
> I proposed nothing, you did the proposing. I spent many hours trying to understand cmake (mission 
> impossible!) and many more hours to implement the previously existing package scheme based
> on the cmake "EXPORT" function.
I agree that cmake is difficult, especially when it comes to creating cmake scripts for library
that should work for other people (as opposed to just using other libraries).
But that is why we should try to follow recommended way of using it.

> 
> > Note however that `include(...)` way is very unusual as one have to know exactly
> > where `...-targets.cmake` is located and standard way in cmake is via `find_package`
> > (similar to how e.g. ROOT, Geant4, etc. are found and linked).
> 
> Very difficult to cut-and-paste "include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)".
> 
> You cannot simplify-out $ENV{MIDASSYS} because computer cannot read your mind, which of the 10 copies
> of midas you want to use from which user account on which day.
One can use `find_package(Midas PATH $ENV{MIDASSYS})` to set specific location of Midas
(this is mentioned in https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/48)
and without `PATH` argument the default system/user locations are searched.

> 
> Argument about "very unusual" I would buy, I am not a cmake expert and I do not know which package
> finding method is in favour today.
> 
> >
> > Though i again admit that maybe the namespace change was a bit too much as it may
> > have broken previous users of `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`
> > 
> 
> I believe it did break at least one experiment, after updating MIDAS to latest version,
> the analyzer would not build.
This unfortunately was not easy to avoid in this case, as both midas and manalyzer depend on each other:
midas should compile when manalyzer is enabled (as submodule)
and manalyzer should compile with midas as separate lib.
So in this case i would expect both midas and manalyzer be updated at same time to their matching versions.

> 
> Speaking of which, did you implement your new scheme for the manalyzer so that it works
> in standalone mode (without MIDAS)?
The only change on manalyzer i did was to use `find_package(Midas ...)` and `midas::midas` target
(see https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/manalyzer/commits/b219a916).
If there is interest to use same scheme in manalyzer as in Midas i can implement it.

> 
> If you did not, now we have two schemes, your new scheme just for MIDAS and my old scheme
> for manalyzer *and* MIDAS. xkcd 927.
> 
> > 
> > - shortcomings of what was before is usage of non-standard `include(...)`
> >
> 
> You should have started by posting a message spelling it out: Konstantin implemented
> a scheme that uses the cmake "export" function to find midas, mfe and manalyzer,
> it is very nice and works ok, but it is non-standard/obsoleted/obscure/frowned-upon/
> unpopular/I-do-not-like-it/I-did-not-invent-it, and I propose implementing a new scheme
> based on find_package().
As i mentioned i did not see you original post about usage of `include`
and otherwise i may have referenced it and though more about compatibility issues.

> 
> >
> > - one shortcoming i see for new implementation is usage `midas::` namespace
> >   (mentioned above) that may have broken some setups
> > 
> 
> If you think that your changes will break other people code, you should explicitely
> say this in a message to this forum and hopefully provide instruction on fixing it,
> i.e. in your makefile, please replace "midas" with "midas::midas".
In the original message to this thread i posted reference to PR
(https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/48)
where it shows how to use `find_package` with this change.
As i did not expect the direct use of `include()` form
and assumed that manual linking was used (via specifying include/lib paths/names)
some scenarios where code for people broke were missed (not taken into account) by me.

> 
> > 
> > - `find_package` is standard and recommended way of finding packages
> >
> 
> Do you have a reference for this? When I look at cmake documentation, I do not see
> any specific recommendation on creating packages and finding them. I do see
> other people's code for finding packages and often spend hours fighting
> them because said methods are designed to work only on the developer's laptop.
see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.27/guide/importing-exporting/index.html:
- about use of `find_package` see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/guide/using-dependencies/index.html#guide:Using%20Dependencies%20Guide
- about double colon namespace for target see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.27/guide/importing-exporting/index.html
  where it is mentioned "This convention of double-colons gives CMake a hint that the name is an IMPORTED target when it is used by downstream projects".

> 
> P.S. Did anybody ask Ben to update the MidasWiki documentation with the new find_package() information?
> 
> K.O.