Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
We're not particularly opposed to a CMake build system, but the SCons one works
well enough for us (Image Engine) and we don't have the expertise or time to
switch to CMake (our internal build system is SCons based). If someone with the
right skills were to want to put in the effort then it's definitely something
we could talk about.
As for the feature set selection, what level of granularity are you looking
for? You can already build with or without the maya, nuke, renderman, houdini
and arnold components, so are you wanting to break the core library down into
more components? Personally I feel that we could benefit from breaking the core
into a more structured set of modules - is that what you were thinking? Any
specific ideas about how you'd like to see things organised?
Original comment by thehaddo...@gmail.com
on 17 Dec 2012 at 5:27
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
Bo.Schwa...@gmail.com
on 17 Dec 2012 at 2:20