On 12/27/00 1:10 PM, "Peter Vogel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to echo this, JDD's proposal "feels right" from my > 12 years perspective doing configuration management/automated > build/deployment. Thanks.. :) Admittedly, it needs a bit more work but I've been slacking the last few days like everybody should be. :) > At the top level, there is a "Construct" file. Invocation > of "cons" in a subdirectory will lead to an upward search > for a file named "Construct". Subdirectories/subprojects > anywhere contain a "Conscript" file. This is by convention, > a Construct and a Conscript file are the same, with the > exception that the initial invocation of "cons" looks for > Construct, and the Construct file gets command line args passed > to it. However, once cons has started, a Construct and a Conscript > file are equivalent. Interesting. It does follow to some degree the Workspace/Module seperation in proposal as it is (http://www.x180.net/Projects/Build/) where the difference between Workspace and Module is slight. Where the current proposal differs (as has been noted elsewhere) is the way that it "merges" these concepts at runtime when executed. I'm going to print off the rest of the email that you sent and wrap my head around it with respect to the proposal I made... :) .duncan -- James Duncan Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED] !try; do()
