On Thu, 9 May 2013 17:06:35 -0400 Gary Oberbrunner <ga...@oberbrunner.com> wrote:
> I see this as an iterative process. The first thing was to > rationalize the tool chain and use one tool for everything. Formerly > we had a hodgepodge of stuff. Now that it's decently organized, > there's of course more work to be done to make the doc better, more > beautiful and readable, and so on -- and we can consider switching to > alternative tools too; at least everything parses and validates now! > So it's conceivable to convert it if that makes sense. Thank you for that. I was simply not aware about the whole context. :-( Now it is clear and makes much more sense. Once again, kudos to Dirk for his work on the doc toolchain which is often thankless job. > (By the way, I use git at work and for some other open source > projects, and I have to say, even though it's more complicated and > the doc is poor and the commands args are inconsistent, I like it a > lot more than mercurial. Having the right core architecture and > philosophy makes all the difference.) Strangely enough, I was avoiding getting 'dirty' with Git always assuming (prejudices, prejudices...) that's it's very (too) complicated to use, but now I find it's very pleasurable and easy to use, even easier than some other DVCS tool (darcs is still the king of UI, imho). Sincerely, Gour -- When your intelligence has passed out of the dense forest of delusion, you shall become indifferent to all that has been heard and all that is to be heard. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 _______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
