Le mardi 08 septembre 2009 à 19:53 +0100, Graham Percival a écrit : > For the record (as discussed in private email), I'm quite > concerned about waf's relative new-ness and occasional lack of > development. My preference would be to use a stable, widely used > build system, since any problems in the build system can cause a > huge problem to developers.
Yes, and slowness is one problem I doubt SCons can address. As far as I ahve looked (not very far), it uses so many more classes and class instantiations than Waf in the user scripts, for example. > That said, lilypond *does* have a > history of pushing the edge, both in terms of libraries, but also > with git. So I guess that waf would fit nicely in that. :) Exactly :-P > The most important two factors, in my mind, are "how interested > are you?" (very interested), and "will you have enough time to > finish it?". I'm not so concerned about using waf for everything, > but do you think you can get the docs using waf before you become > busy again? Frankly, I don't know right now, and anyway I've already become busy again; more important is when will have no longer the right to spend a lot of time on Lily development (from January). I'm going to learn Waf and play with it a little, then I'll be able to compute an estimation. Cheers, John
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
