Hi Dominic, Thanks for bringing this to light again:)
(more inline) 2009/4/7 Dominic Hargreaves <[email protected]> > On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 08:49:27AM -0700, Dane Springmeyer wrote: > > > > On Apr 5, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Andreas Volz wrote: > > > > Yes, the configure script needs to be included. Without the users have > > > to install all the autoconf, automake, libtool stuff. > > > > > > In normal autotools environment you generate the package with "make > > > dist" or "make distcheck". I could simply add a rule to include the > > > SConstruct files as extra data. Then packaging would be easier. Or two > > > different packages: > > > > > > mapnik_scons-0.6.0.tar.gz > > > mapnik_autotools-0.6.0.tar.gz > > > > > > each with its own build environment. Many ways are possible. > > > > > > > > > Ah, I see - thanks for the explanation. Perhaps Artem or Dominic will > > have ideas about the best way to package. Your idea of two different > > packages sounds good to me. > > I think trying to maintain two parallel build environments is a bad > idea, and as far as I 'm concerned the build system for mapnik at the > moment is scons. Correct! > > > That would have to be changed by consensus, and then have someone make > sure that the autotools stuff builds the same end result, and then > remove scons and update documentation. The current half-way house I see > as damaging to the project, as it simply introduces confusion. > Agree. > > Note that since Dane's good work recently I don't see much difference > between scons and autotools, We even have 'configure' step now :) > although I would like there not to be a > bundled scons install (as well as not bundling fonts, libagg, > tinyxml...) in the source package. > Having local libagg and tinyxml makes building on other than Linux OS a better experience. Also, libagg is not maintained at the moment and we might add new features/fixes (in fact this is already the case). Bundling scons is quite common practice - I don't see a problem here. For example boost libraries come with their own build system packaged in source distribution. Having _free_ fonts as part of Mapnik works very well for me too. re: Autotools - lets make it plain, I don't see Mapnik moving back to using Autotools as the main build system any time soon. If anything it'll move to Boost.Build.v2 ;) For Make/Autotools fans there is : mapnik-0.1.tar.gz<http://prdownload.berlios.de/mapnik/mapnik-0.1.tar.gz> Having said that, I don't mind having extra build options in trunk (Autotools, CMake etc) To summarise : SCons is the official build system for the current Mapnik source distribution. For anything else , if it works for you - great. > Dominic. > Thanks, Artem > > -- > Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/ > PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email) > _______________________________________________ > Mapnik-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-devel >
_______________________________________________ Mapnik-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-devel
