[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: Headless build [was Re: [cdt-dev] RIP Wascana, Build System discussion]
|
> In my mind any other build system integrations should fall in the
> standard build camp. The automated internal builder should be simple
> and efficient (at least then we're not trying to sprint before we can
> walk :) ). Th APIs provided by the standard build system could allow
> ISV additional flexibility to interface to and generate build scripts
> for their-builder-of-choice.
So to clarify this, both Standard and Internal Builder could use the
same build model. The Standard APIs provide hooks for extenders to
generate their own build scripts -- with Makefiles being a canonical
example. The Internal Builder could be the default mechanism for
building in the IDE for users without a special ISV extended CDT.
The only problem is that we have a pretty good internal builder today
(i.e. it works), so I'm confident about the Internal Builder half. The
unconstrained nature of interfacing to any-arbitrary-build-system
means that it's necessarily hard and likely pie in the sky...
James