illushin

Yggdrasil guessed right, i come from spring. hm, is that really a killer feature? What kind of speedup are you seeing from parallel builds? I personally never use parallel builds, as i like to still be able to work painlessly with my machine (Dual Core), even when compiling. Also, i usually dont work under windows. There is actually just one of the main devs of spring i know of, which uses SCons, because of this reason. i would not say that SCons does not scale well.. it may scale up even better, as it is actually phyton, so you have the flexibility of a fully working programming language. CMake is rather limited in that sence, which is why you end up with more simple/clean build files in the end, and its still powerfull, i would say. i guess this is no problem for you, but both of them are really tailored towards native sources. it is possible to make them work with others too. eg we did with Java, where SCons ... theoretically has better support, but it is pretty bad in practice for anything more then a hello world example. CMake only supports source file change detection for native sources by default.

This is my first post in this forum, i only know that you use SVN and release (or at least plan to) on Windows, Linux nad OS X. I work in a relatively big open source strategy game project, which uses SCons since more then 4 years, and added CMake 2 years ago, to slowly replace SCons. so now we still use both in parallel, but CMake clearly the favourable method. it is much easier and painless to maintain, and has petter performance, plus it can, as you want it, create visual studio projects (and for many other IDEs, eg KDevelop, Code::Blocks, ...), which scons can not. The only reason why we still use SCons is, that CMake does not support building in parallel under windows, while SCons does. This applies to MinGW, it may work wiht other compilers. Our project uses GIT as versioning system, and in certain scenarios, SCons allows a smoother working process (less compile time) for devs, if they work with many branches in a single repository. This is the case because SCons's support for caching object files (like ccache). An other build system you may consider, is Waf, which is kind of a predecessor of SCons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waf I have no personal expericne with it, but its said to be less a hassle to maintain then SCons.