Eric S. Raymond wrote: > WAF <http://code.google.com/p/waf/> > > Pros: All the advantages of scons. Very small and lightweight. One > script, no installation; you drop a copy in your project directory, > write a handful of declarations in wscript files, and go. Recommended > to us by a GNOME dev with both cmake and scons experience. > > Cons: Documentation is poor. Relatively new project, small dev team. > > I'd like to say we should go with WAF -- the lightness of the design > appeals to me, and we've had it recommended. However, having read > both sets of documentation, I think it would be more prudent to go > with scons. > > Comments welcome, especially from anyone with experience of these tools. >
Waf aims to have similar interface for user as is in automake which might make it easier for users. But I think we should check if developers are active and would help us to migrate to waf. Specially when it has poor documents and not widely used. We might found some bugs that needs quick fixing or missing features. Waf claims to work in any platform where python works so it might even help windows and mac. Probably needs some tweaking. Pauli _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
