Hi Jake, to use your version control picture: Are we trying to sell subversion by showing how great that is compared to CVS and RCS, while git is just getting introduced into the market?
I am still missing a comparison of qbs and *current* build system options. All I see is qbs vs. qmake and qbs vs. cmake 2.x. Neither qmake nor cmake is what qbs will be competing with by the time it is ready to be used in earnest. So far we excluded most possible build systems on the grounds that they do not support the mixed host/target builds we do. That requirement is going away. So we have more options now. Just to name two: Bazel promises great scalability and reliability, meson claims to be simple and fast. Even CMake made a lot of progress since version 2.x. I would also appreciate getting some numbers to back up the claims made about qbs. Best Regards, Tobias -- Tobias Hunger, Senior Software Engineer | The Qt Company The Qt Company GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho. Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
