Re: [glob2-devel] the beginning of mac OS X development

[Martin Voelkle]

> > The numbering scheme seems to be a matter of believes  ...
> > I think only debian cares about the alpha keyword.
> > And only our *.deb files are called alpha.
>
> I mean as in verbal chat, when people talk to eachother, and on the
> website, we always say "Alpha 21" or "Alpha 16" or something along
> those lines.
>
> >
> > I think 0.9 would be more consistent than 0.21 .
>
> This isn't a bad idea, our next release could be version 0.9, and we
> start counting up from there on our release candidates for 1.0.
>
> > Hey, have a look:
> >  SCons 0.96.95 (candidate for 0.97) ...
> > Now, we know the meaning of .8. in our version numbering.
>
> Still, 0.8 has lost its physical meaning, since the project has been
> on 0.8 for so long.

Maybe I don't remember well, but I think that the 0.8 where supposed
to be alphas and the 0.9 would be betas. But I totally agree that this
doesn't mean anything anymore because we have been on 0.8 for so long.

> > I have googled to compare scons and cmake.
> > And scons was the definite looser.
> > - portability issues on non-unix systems.
> > - slow development
> > - KDE really wanted to use this, but gave up.
> >   Now they use cmake.
>
> I have successfully deployed Scons on windows, in fact it seemed
> trivial to do, much easier than using autotools or similar. The only
> downside I feel for scons is its autoconf like functionality, which is
> lacking somewhat. However, again, since scons uses python, its
> possible and easy to wrap programs like SDL-config on unix or develop
> the tests on our own. Boost and sdl libraries are named consistently
> so they are no issue.
>
> I've heard allot about the popularity of Cmake, allot of people like
> it. I have little experience with it so I can't argue its benefits.

Although I have never used it, I have read (from the LWN article) that
using CMake you can generate either a Makefile to build on UNIX, or a
KDevelop project, or an XCode project, or an MS Visual Studio project.

This means that with a single configuration, you can target multiple
build systems quite easily.

> > http://lwn.net/Articles/188693/
> > http://swik.net/SCons+cmake
> >
> > But I didn't spend much time on this research.
> >
> > Just looked into the scons Changelog:
> > latest stable release:
> > RELEASE 0.96.1 - Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:55:50 +0000
> > http://www.scons.org/CHANGES.txt
> >
> >
> > Another system would be bjam which is used and written by the boost 
> developers.