Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Design

Timestamp:

Dec 13, 2011, 11:42:10 AM (12 years ago)

Author:

/C=FR/O=CNRS/OU=UMR8607/CN=Christian Arnault/emailAddress=arnault@…

Comment:

--

Design

@@ -9 +9 @@
  * Work by Sébastien around Mana (Atlas) + WAF
  * Work by Christian around a CMT-like layer on top of CMake 
- * Optimization developments for CMT itself, in the direction of a project build, and reducing the internal overhead factors during the CMT-based build.
+ * Optimization developments for CMT itself by Grigory, in the direction of a project build, and reducing the internal overhead factors during the CMT-based build.
 
-It’s time now, considering the long term schedules (mainly considering the long shut down of LHC) to decide on a transition phase for this project: stopping the R&D phase and entering the development phase.
+It’s time now, considering the long term schedule (mainly considering the long shutdown of LHC) to decide on a transition phase for this project: 
+  
+  stopping the R&D phase => entering the development phase.
 
 So far, my vision of the possible scenarii is as follows:
@@ -24 +26 @@
 This is appropriate only if this is achieved on a relatively short planning (order of 2-3 months)
 
+
 === Comments and issues on scenario 2
 The requirements for such a development should consider
@@ -29 +32 @@
  * The current list of candidate tool (CMake, WAF) 
 
-One proposed architecture for the new tool should permit developers to:
+One proposed architecture for the new tool should permit us to:
  * Select (or design) a declarative language for the configuration parameters
  * Select an architecture of packages/projects for the software base supported by the tool