Stefan Lang <langstefan / gmx.at> writes:

> On Sunday 05 June 2005 10:48, Christian Neukirchen wrote:
>> Jim Freeze <jim / freeze.org> writes:
>> > * Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen / gmail.com> [2005-06-05 07:59:15 
> +0900]:
>> >> Package doesn't try to conquer the world, however, it aims to be just
>> >> a tool that would be useful if it was standard and everyone could
>> >> build on due to it's policy-neutrality
>> >>
>> >> What advantages will Package have over setup.rb and mkmf.rb, as
>> >> they are now?
>> >
>> > I find mkmf.rb very useful to create a Makefile when I am building a C
>> > wrapper to some library. Will Package do the same thing, or will mkmf
>> > still be needed?
>>
>> Package will try to provide a more clean (no icky globals, for
>> example) API for the things mkmf.rb does.  I think I'll start with a
>> recent mkmf.rb and refactor it heavily.
>
> A clean API sounds good, it would be nice if it could be used as a
> library to allow easy integration into other tools, e.g. Rant.
> OTOH if Package uses Rant or Rake it is easier to make it portable
> and there would be less dependencies on external (non-Ruby) tools.

I agree.  However, Package should not have any dependencies that are
not in the Ruby standard libraries.

> Stefan
-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen / gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org