Talk:Software build

"source code is believed to consist"?

"the source code for current versions of the Linux operating system is believed to consist of millions of lines of source code in thousands of files" -- Don't we know? Is there really any uncertainty about this issue, or is this an example of weasel wording? WP:WEASEL -- 201.50.249.78 17:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I too found this statement too vague. I added a verification needed template. --Abdull 14:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge from Build management

After almost two years the body of the Build management article... er, page... still consists of a single bullet list of five items. It looks like something from a PowerPoint deck on a software build management product or seminar. I'm not saying there is any evidence of WP:COI there, just that that does not meet "acceptable article" criteria. If there is no more to say about build management than that, it should be said here. WP clearly does not need a separate "management of the process" article for this particular "about the process" article. Jeh (talk) 04:19, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

...and hearing no objection or even comment, it's done. Jeh (talk) 14:35, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed: Build Tools section improvements

In looking at the build tools section there is no mention of the different classifications of tools as expressed in Build automation or List of build automation software. The list of examples is also inconsistent with those presented on the build automation page which lists: (like Make, Rake, MS build, Ant, Gradle etc.). I'd like to edit this section to provide consistency with the other related topics. I've never edited content on a WP page before and wanted to check first here. Mark Edington (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)