On Wednesday 22 August 2007 19:00:20 Bo Peng wrote: > > OTHO the development of scons was stalled for a long time. I had not > > used it for more than one year after the introduction in lyx because it > > required the use of an unreleased version. > > As I have said, scons' development is much better now. > > > As a linux guy I use KDE and I do not forget that for KDE4 scons was > > dropped for cmake. > > I see that this has been hurting scons' reputation a lot. :-( Anyway, > scons has greate potential. Otherwise, they wouldn't have won three > google summer coding awards in two years.
Note that the point in not KDE to choose cmake over scons, after all lyx does not have all the requirements of KDE. My point here was the reasons why the decision was made and that was strongly tied with the first reason cited above, stalled development. I am happy that it is no more the case. > Anyway, in contrast to what Peter and Andre have done to make lyx > compile faster, with all the pch and combine-files tricks, I have > tried to make scons easier to understand and use, by providing uniform > and reliable build across all supported platforms. > > > That will not happen. :-) > > If cmake can achieve all I need, I may stop working on scons. Right > now, this is not the case. OK. I agree with André, while none of the competitors offers the same features of autotools we are not ready to change. :-( And you know that I would drop m4 for python in an eye blink. ;-) > Bo -- José Abílio
