Re: [CMake] VMWare on SCons' future
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 2:30 AM, Jesper Eskilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brandon Van Every wrote: On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nabble.com/SCons-Future-Directions-and-Thoughts-td15176258.html you can learn tons about SCons from that thread. And there's one *really* spectacular public flame, if you need a motive to stay awake reading through it. Care to elaborate for those of use too lazy to read through the whole thing? No, not really. I want you to feel a sense of anticipation and reward for working all the way through it. :-) Trust me though, you don't get fireworks like that from a core contributor every day. Cheers, Brandon Van Every ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] VMWare on SCons' future
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: VMWare is a large commercial project. http://www.nabble.com/SCons-Future-Directions-and-Thoughts-td15176258.html My impression so far is that SCons appeals to a company that wants to program a customized build system, rather than have one off-the-shelf that already works. Here's an exemplar: http://www.nabble.com/SCons-Future-Directions-and-Thoughts-td15176258i60.html I don't think we'll ever be able to define a model for how tools should look, or how command lines should be generically specified, that will satisfy everyone. It's just not possible. After I wrote my original email, I got a lot of feedback (some through the list, some outside the list) from people who use the tools exactly in the way that we at VMware do. That is, we don't use them. We wrote our own generic command lines, and our own module loading mechanism. The part of scons we reuse is the machinery to convert the environment variables into actual command lines, but we don't use any of the built in variable schema at all. We write our own scanners, and our own builders. CMake should not seek to emulate this business model. Let the SCons guys have it, and let them flounder in it. For pete's sake they're arguing in committee bazaar fashion about how to deploy a stable release cycle. They're way behind CMake in some areas. I'm open to Python, Ruby, or Lua demonstrating something important about scripting languages and build systems, but the SCons crowd seems so dominated by other problems that it doesn't seem all that relevant. They're not proving anything about Python; in fact, they're proving that Python 1.5 is a serious liability over the long haul. It's slow and hard to modify the SCons core. That's another tidbit somewhere in that thread, you can learn tons about SCons from that thread. Cheers, Brandon Van Every ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] VMWare on SCons' future
On Monday 03 March 2008, Brandon Van Every wrote: On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: VMWare is a large commercial project. http://www.nabble.com/SCons-Future-Directions-and-Thoughts-td15176258.htm l My impression so far is that SCons appeals to a company that wants to program a customized build system, rather than have one off-the-shelf that already works. A customized build system requires dedicated manpower and exotic needs. VMWare has those needs; it has been pointed out that many other companies do not have such needs, nor dedicated full-time in-house build guru expertise. Also, when the build system is programmable, people seem to start treating it as a library rather than an end user tool. Yes, that was my impression too. Alex ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] VMWare on SCons' future
Brandon Van Every wrote: On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:06 PM, Brandon Van Every [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.nabble.com/SCons-Future-Directions-and-Thoughts-td15176258.html you can learn tons about SCons from that thread. And there's one *really* spectacular public flame, if you need a motive to stay awake reading through it. Care to elaborate for those of use too lazy to read through the whole thing? -- /Jesper ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
