And yes, I have > 130 days of paid leave :)
If finding a job in French is easy, I will try to go there.
Bo> These will be added on a one by one basis. The advantage of scons Bo> is that (almost) anyone can read SConstruct and add the feature he Bo> wants. I *will not* add every single feature that autotools have Bo> now. But you will eventually?
I do not know. If something comes out as a request, I (or someone else) will add it. If it does not show up till the end, that means this feature is not needed.
The idea of reimplementing the m4 code I wrote in python because you prefer python to autoconf does not appeal to me a lot.
I know. scons lacks of a huge library of such things. I actually copied the SELECT_ARG thing from the autoconf source code. However, if something is not readily available, it will be much easier for me to implement in Python. I guess you can read scons_utils.py and make your judgement. (BTW, we do need to copy various autoconf macros to the config directory, and those macros are usually longer (and more obscure) than their python counterparts.)
Bo> No. I have no intention, as of now, to replace autotools with Bo> scons. All I need is a quicker and more flexible method to build Bo> lyx for my own lyx coding. I have shown some advantages of scons Bo> over autotools under linux, and Abdel will surely show you more Bo> gains under windows. That is currently enough for us. Is there hope to avoid requiring installing SCons before compiling LyX from tar.gz? The python requirement itself is pretty much OK, since we use it elsewhere.
Such a thing exists. It is called scons-local, readily downloadable with scons source. If some procedure requires ./configure. make, make install, we can fake them. Bo
