On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:57:12AM -0500, Bo Peng wrote:
> >It should not be in svn beforee it at least can compile linux
> >trivially.
>
> And it will work trivially under windows soon, if more testing, as a
> result of more publicity is allowed. I guarantee you that it will
> achieve a state of convenience that autotools will never achieve
> there.
>
> >I must admit that I got pretty angry when you commited this without
> >evnen asking for comments or if it was ok.
>
> I apologize if you feel that way. I had a feeling from our previous
> discussions that you will be staying out of this scons business
> (although you did not like the idea) and let *us* do what we want.
>
> So, can we cheer up a little bit and see what others say about this scons
> build?
I like the idea of scons and vote to keep it in the trunk.
However, if the final disposition of this argument is to have scons being
tweaked in some branch, so be it.
When "scons install" works, I will look at making it part of my daily builds.
Perhaps I can make the 3AM one use "make" and the 3PM one use "scons"...
---Kayvan
--
Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids:
Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan, | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89)
http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | my beautiful Queen. | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
