Lars Gullik Bjønnes a écrit :
"Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > > don't decide these things, it was (and still is) my personal opinion.
| >
| > Nobody said otherwise, that's what I meant. Saying nothing is an
| > implicit approval, except for the project manager. An quite frankly I
| > don't understand what's so scaring about having a parallel build system
| > that do not touch _at_ _all_ the present system.
|
| Exactly. I know scons is not perfect right now, but I do not expect
| anyone who does not like it to use it either. Why cannot Lars and
| other autotools fans just *ignore* the scons stuff? (That is why I
| submit it withoug asking.)
And that was bad...
| What is so bad about giving people a choice?
Half-baked sulutions that we not even know if we are going to use are a
curse.
The KDE project had lived with _four_ build system at the same time in
svn for _months_ before they choose one. I reckon LyX could live with
two during a couple of month and see how it goes.
| What is terribly wrong to let windows developers compile lyx
| quicker and easier?
Nothing per se, but you are very wrong to focus only on windows.
_IFF_ we are going to change the build system we must chane to
something that works for all targets.
| I will not have time to maintain a branch.
So who will make scons work with unix/linux and all the
build/distribution/checking/testing targets that we have in auto*?
If the answer is "Not me" then scons has no place in svn.
That mentality of one man/one feature is plain *wrong*. Of course Bo
cannot test for every target on the moon by himself. Completeness will
only happen if testing takes place. Without it being in trunk, this will
simply never happen.
| I was trying to save *me
| and people would will welcome such a choice* some time by using a more
| flexible build system for me, not to spend more time.
I do not care to much about "me" I care for "us"; as a whole.
Wrong, you don't care about us, that is, Bo, me and whoever would like
to try compiling LyX under windows.
Abdel.
