| Saying 'GNU Make' particularly was an automatism. When I use Make I do use GNU Make specifically. I do not have experience with BSD Make, or other Make dialects. > did actually do a suitable job of replacing gnu make The title does not say _a replacement_, it says _an alternative_. I never intended to replace GNU Make; if I said that anywhere — that was a mistake on my part. > do improve upon those who created unix I did not intend to improve upon UNIX ideas or philosophy. The improvements I am aiming for are: - developer experience, - conciseness and maintainability of the code. …and these are being addressed for a narrow use case. For that use case, in my experience, Make is very often used. I argue that within the bounds of this use case, this is an alternative which can be of use to improve productivity and everyday experience. > I don't really understand the full job make does, so here is something which only does a simpler job which I do understand, and I like python I classify these assumptions about my understanding or misunderstanding as ad hominem and unprofessional. |
In other words, make(1) does a lot of things, one of which is to run shell commands. If this the only thing you care about and your project offers, it would be better expressed as "Pythonic way to run commands" or something, with no mention of make.