Samba 4 build system (was: Re: Samba3 build farm can't execute
abartlet at samba.org
Tue Jan 1 02:13:25 GMT 2008
On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 01:34 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> To respond to some more of your comments about this on IRC: I think
> replacing the build system is less important than replacing the EJS
> with Python, because there is a lot less code to rewrite when changing
> this, and the effect on external developers is less high.
> However, I think it is still important to get rid of the current build
> system because it is making a lot of things harder. I would rather go
> forward with something we know works than having to add another hack
> to the current system every week... I think converting to such a
> system will not be as much work as the conversion to Python, and I'll
> see if I can propose a patch for this soon.
Most things would be less work than the conversion to Python however :-)
My main concern is that there are other things I would love to have your
attention on. On the flip side, it is hardly efficient for developers
to struggle with the current build system (and phantom bugs caused by
loading old libraries/modules) and be patching things up week by week.
Andrew Bartlett http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc. http://redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20080101/67b1e932/attachment.bin
More information about the samba-technical