[RFC] depend on testtools for testing?

[Robert Collins]

On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 06:35 +0000, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 09:21 +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> [ . . . ]
> > I am willing to revisit having a setup.py for the python library. I
> > would have thought though, that just installing mingw w/autoconf
> > +automake+libtool would have let subunit build without trouble.
> [ . . . ]
> 
> Is that a sane toolchain for anything these days?  I would have thought
> Waf or SCons would be the first choice.

Scons is actually more complex and less featureful than the autotools
toolchain. Autotools is essentially a make preprocessor, and while make
has some limitations [no simple support for built-variables,
datestamps-not-hashing], it is extremely solid, robust and complete in
nearly all other ways.

Waf, like Scons is an 80% project: if you fit the 80%, it will do
brilliantly, but if you're outside it [say you want to cross compile]
then it falls short.

Thats not to say you can't make them work - you can. But its harder.
Subunit actually used Scons for a few years, but as its needs grew I got
tired of reimplementing things included in the autotools toolchain.

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20091030/ecac6bc2/attachment.pgp