# PARAVIEW\_INSTALL DEVELOPMENT\_FILES still used in ParaView 5.7?

**URL:** https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456
**Category:** Development
**Created:** [August 20, 2019, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456 "2019-08-20T13:37:05Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Charles\_Gueunet](https://discourse.paraview.org/user_avatar/discourse.paraview.org/charles_gueunet/32/40_2.png) [@Charles\_Gueunet](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/Charles_Gueunet)
#### Post date: [August 20, 2019, 1:37pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456/1 "2019-08-20T13:37:05Z")

</div>

I would like to know if the option `PARAVIEW_INSTALL_DEVELOPMENT_FILES` is still used in ParaView5.7. It seems it only adds some tests for ctest but has no real impact on the install process.  
So my questions are:

- Is this option still useful ?
- Is it the default ParaView’s behavior to install its development files now ?
- Can we build ParaView plugin against a Paraview install folder in the v5.7 ?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![ben.boeckel](https://discourse.paraview.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/ea5d25/32.png) [@ben.boeckel](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/ben.boeckel)
#### Post date: [August 20, 2019, 5:25pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456/2 "2019-08-20T17:25:27Z")

</div>

> It seems it only adds some tests for ctest but has no real impact on the install process.

Oh, that’s an oversight. Which direction (removal was skipped or it doesn’t affect the install) is up for debate.

> Is this option still useful ?

Personally, I don’t think so, but maybe others do.

> Is it the default ParaView’s behavior to install its development files now ?

Yes.

> Can we build ParaView plugin against a Paraview install folder in the v5.7 ?

Yes! 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/user_avatar/discourse.paraview.org/mwestphal/32/17_2.png) [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [August 21, 2019, 7:10am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456/3 "2019-08-21T07:10:04Z")

</div>

> [@ben.boeckel](#):
>
> > Can we build ParaView plugin against a Paraview install folder in the v5.7 ?
> 
> Yes! 🙂

Great ! Is there a roadmap for an actual binary SDK release ?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![ben.boeckel](https://discourse.paraview.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/ea5d25/32.png) [@ben.boeckel](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/ben.boeckel)
#### Post date: [August 21, 2019, 11:49am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/paraview-install-development-files-still-used-in-paraview-5-7/2456/4 "2019-08-21T11:49:04Z")

</div>

No, shipping an SDK is a harder problem. Though plausible on Windows because Visual Studio is so uniform and easy to describe, but the other platforms have issues with how to build compatible plugins. Nevermind using that SDK to make redistributable plugins (generally requiring building on CentOS6 with a devtoolset for Linux; probably some other shenanigans for macOS).