From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-27 01:51:25
On Wednesday 26 April 2006 21:50, Alex Besogonov wrote:
> > Also, it is not possible to support different build models (e.g. Java/C#
> > compile everything in one pass) or support orthogonal toolsets. What
> > I mean by orthogonal toolsets is performing a build that uses msvc for
> > C++ compilation and WiX for MSI/Installer generation.
> Maybe we can setup a Wiki to draft the requirements for the BBv3?
I'm a bit nervous about "BBv3". You see, what we have now is not ideal, but
it's working codebase. I seriously doubt that there are architectural changes
that can't be done on the existing code (or its Python port), and given large
number of tests, after the changes Boost.Build will continue to be usable. So
I think the best course of action in the mid-time would be:
- Finish C++ Boost transition to V2
- Port V2 to Python
- Gradually change architecture to any new requirements
> willing to take part in BBv3 development.
That would be very good!
-- Vladimir Prus http://vladimir_prus.blogspot.com Boost.Build V2: http://boost.org/boost-build2
Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk