"Kagamin" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Nick Sabalausky Wrote: > >> From: "Russel Winder" <[email protected]> >> > >> >I agree with the premise that package management must be a core part of >> >the build management, >> >> If I understand what you're saying correctly, then I strongly disagree. A >> package management tool, by necessity, must be a common agreed-upon >> standard >> (otherwise it won't serve it's purpose). But if that package management >> is >> tied into build management then we're *also* forcing a single standard >> build >> system on everyone. So then instead of being able to choose your build >> system, everyone now has to come to an agreement on the same build >> system, >> which #1: Is unlikely to ever happen, and #2: Serves no useful purpose. > > A build tool should be able to invoke a package manager and package > manager should be able to invoke a build tool, this doesn't mean a tie, it > means a working out of the box solution.
Ok, that does make sense. >This solution is meant to just work. If people don't want solution that >just works, they can go with something else of course. For example I prefer >makefiles.
