The slide deck seems like a pitch for more funding to create a CMake replacement, rather than a description of that replacement, right? It ends with "A $1M+ in

The slide deck seems like a pitch for more funding to create a CMake replacement, rather than a description of that replacement, right? It ends with "A $1M+ investment in a new CMake language(s) and translation tools could avoid a future massively expensive transition of ASC [Advanced Simulation and Computing, at Sandia National labes] codes to another tool like Meson that could easily cost more than $10M across the ASC program and negatively impact developer productivity while the transition is taking place." I'm curious: is there any way to estimate how much US taxpayer support went into creating CMake? Would CMake exist were it not for the DOE and/or NSF grants that Kitware got? Getting that kind of support isn't a fault of CMake, but I think it's a meaningful property in considering and comparing different software development projects, and evaluating their long-term health.