[Scons-dev] SCons + Tup?

[Russel Winder]

Cristina,

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 11:28 +0100, Cristina Yenyxe González García
wrote:

> Hello,

> 

> In my job, we recently ran away from Make and began using SCons, and

> we really LOVE it :) So far, we have used it for small projects, but

> we are guessing how it will perform when they grow.


Glad you like it. Personally I only have small builds so I have no
experience of big builds, but I know many on this list have, and indeed
Jason has very big builds and has built Parts, which is an add on to
SCons with a few changes to core SCons – which we are hoping to absorb
into SCons as and when we can.


> I was wondering whether it would be feasible to integrate some of

> Tup's ideas into SCons. I suppose you've heard about Tup; otherwise,

> you can check this paper on its principles:

> http://gittup.org/tup/build_system_rules_and_algorithms.pdf

> I've not yet taken a look at any of their source code, so I don't know

> how hard would it be...


As stated ("integrate some of Tup's ideas into SCons") this is an
impossible requirement ;-) On the other hand it is also feasible if we
can be more specific on "some of Tup's ideas".

At present SCons is a pure volunteer team, no organization is backing
SCons by direct funds or by having people work on the implementation.
This means anyone who has any interest has to enter issues into the
issue tracker (http://scons.tigris.org/project_issues.html) and/or clone
the source and create (in a test-driven way) changes and pull requests.
This is the only way SCons progresses. It really is a classic "bazaar
development" process.  So if we can work out what from Tup would be
useful to SCons users and create some issues, it is then a question of
hoping that someone find interest and time in making the needed
amendments to the code.

I have not used Tup but I know of it and that many like the fact that it
inverts the direction of arrows in the DAG so that it incorporates
watching the file system for changes that trigger rebuilds. It would
help if https://github.com/gittup/tup/issues/84 resulted in tup getting
into the Debian repository.

Interestingly (or not) the paper you refer to has one reference to Peter
Miller: SCons used to use Aegis, but then moved to Subversion and now
Mercurial. Many would argue that it would have been better for Aegis to
have become mainstream, rather than Git, Mercurial and Bazaar to have
taken over.
-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20121113/9fb439c7/attachment.pgp>