Re: Why Jam?

From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 11:08:34

--- In boost_at_y..., Iain.Hanson_at_u... wrote:
>      
> 
> Author:  williamkempf (williamkempf_at_h...) at unix,mime
> Date:    22/02/02 14:48
> 
> --- In boost_at_y..., "braden_mcdaniel" <braden_at_e...> wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >> performance metrics. But where deployment is concerned, Windows 
is 
> >> downright developer-*hostile*.
>      
> >I disagree.  MSI installations are much friendly then autotools 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> come on guys. we're surely not going to have a my platform is 
better than 
> yours contest here.

No, I didn't mean my comments to indicate this.  I was simply 
pointing out that autotools may be the best solution for POSIX 
platforms, but it's a difficult solution on Windows and definately in 
no way better then the native tools.  (Granted, MSI installations 
aren't portable and thus don't address the configuration issues that 
autotools does... but this thread strayed a bit from that original 
topic.)

> If people want to submitt autotools or MSI build and install 
scripts I 
> don't personally see a problem with that. But boost::developers 
should 
> stick with our current agreed build environment.

I heartily agree.

Bill Kempf