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. 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. There's talk of refining SCons into different engines and layers and so forth. These could all be strategic reasons to avoid offering general programmability. Perhaps most of the customers really don't want it. What Would Microsoft Do? They'd wait for someone else to do the R&D, then clone it. Perhaps it's better to let companies customize to their hearts' content in SCons, figure out the build feature they really need (like "a programmable dependency graph" in the case of VMWare), then provide some feature in CMake that answers that specific need. I am starting to wonder if the whole Lua thing is indeed a red herring, and what CMake really needs is the best possible website to document, tutorialize, and market CMake. In other words, what we've got is fine; go sell it. Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list [email protected] http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
