Re: Hmmm.... future of cons?

[Doug Alcorn]

address@hidden writes:

> This brings up the question of what "moving on" means for those
> currently using Cons.  Is/will there some way to move from Cons to
> SCons/Python?  Other than rewriting all Construct and Conscript
> files by hand I mean.

<disclaimer> I don't mean to sound like some wise-guy.  I'm certainly
not smart enough to try and tell you anything about your build
environment. </disclaimer>

Why are you concerned about an upgrade path?  If you are using Cons in
a production environment and it is working fine, why upgrade.
Assuming we get Cons to 2.4.0 or 2.4.1 (which merely consolidates well
known enhancements to date), why can't we call it "feature complete"
and be done?

Then any new build environments you need would be done with SCons if
you needed some fancy-dancy, new-fangled feature.  As I've previously
stated, my experience with Cons is with pretty straight-forward build
systems.  My previous employer is using cons 2.3.0 and I bet they
wouldn't have any way of knowing that Cons has upgraded.  The build
environment works for them.  There's no reason to muck with it now.
They probably won't for the foreseeable future.

For those of you with sophisticated build environments, how reasonable
or unreasonable does this sound?

On an unrelated note, someone asked me who the core developers are.
I started to compile my best guess and post it here.  Really all you
have to do is read the Changes file.  You can see who makes the most
contributions from there.
-- 
 (__) Doug Alcorn - Unix/Linux/Web Developing
 oo / PGP 02B3 1E26 BCF2 9AAF 93F1  61D7 450C B264 3E63 D543
 |_/  mailto:address@hidden http://www.lathi.net