...
I recall having problems with picking up the right version of libraries. It's been a while now so my memory is suspect, but I think that old libraries in the Install Area maybe didn't get deleted at the expected time and would get used preferentially. Or something like that. However, I never encountered any such problems with Navid's implementation of a similar functionality, so I don't see any reason to attempt to revive the official CMT Install Area.
5. CMT runtime execution
From David Chamont
I remember to hear often people complaining about the <package>_ROOT variables generated
by CMT. What is the reason for this ? There are too much variables declared by CMT ?
6. CMT Is Too Coarse
From Joanne Bogart
Most of my complaints boil down to a lack of fine control in a natural way. As soon as there is more than one build target in a package, there are likely to be problems. As Navid mentioned, we've had trouble with multiple library targets when one should depend on the other, and trouble in general with multiple targets in a package because often they shouldn't have the same set of use statements. Private/public doesn't do the trick; the only sure way I"m aware of to deal with this is not to have multiple targets in a package unless they have similar or identical properties w.r.t. uses. The CMT use concept is also too coarse with respect to time. A package - actually, a target within a package - might need access to another at run-time but not during compile or link, or at compile and run time, but not link time. There is no way to express this with a use statement.
...