| 02:55 | garyo-home | ok guys, I'm here. |
| 02:56 | garyo-home | Hm, the list looks different already. Someone's been pruning! |
| 02:59 | GregNoel | Scheduled start in two minutes. Is Steven back? |
| 03:00 | garyo-home | He did say he might be late. I vote we just start in a few minutes. There's a lot of bugs to triage. |
| 03:00 | GregNoel | I agree. Who's here and planning to participate? |
| 03:00 | bdbaddog | I'm here. |
| 03:00 | garyo-home | ditto. |
| 03:01 | -!- | jrandall [n=jim@bas1-london14-1096624235.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #scons |
| 03:01 | garyo-home | Are we sorting the list by priority? |
| 03:01 | garyo-home | i.e. 892 is the first one we look at? |
| 03:01 | bdbaddog | I think the link on http://scons.org/wiki/BugParty is to a list sorted by priority. |
| 03:02 | bdbaddog | which starts at 892 |
| 03:02 | GregNoel | You type faster than I do; yes, that's the link |
| 03:02 | garyo-home | thought so. |
| 03:02 | bdbaddog | 430.. |
| 03:02 | bdbaddog | there'll be plenty left, we can defer if we need advice.. ? |
| 03:03 | garyo-home | ok, let's start. I say 892 look interesting but not for now. |
| 03:03 | GregNoel | If we can manage the P1 and P2, plus all the ones that have votes, I'll be satisfied for today. If we can get significantly further, I'll be happy. |
| 03:03 | garyo-home | Steven says he can't even repro it. |
| 03:03 | GregNoel | worksforme |
| 03:04 | GregNoel | Who should resolve it? |
| 03:04 | garyo-home | right, someone should be responsible for actually editing the bugs here. I guess I'll do it. |
| 03:04 | garyo-home | My connection's decent anyway. |
| 03:05 | garyo-home | I just have to learn my way around the darn thing. |
| 03:05 | GregNoel | OK, I appreciate it; my typing is slow enough that it would slow things down significantly |
| 03:05 | garyo-home | no prob. 892 is done. Next? |
| 03:05 | GregNoel | It's really not that hard {;-} |
| 03:05 | GregNoel | 1041 |
| 03:06 | garyo-home | 1041 is from 2005. Looks like maybe a real bug. Defer? |
| 03:06 | GregNoel | I _think_ this has been fixed; I know there's been work done here. Research? |
| 03:06 | bdbaddog | yup. looks like needs to be run on cygwin? |
| 03:07 | garyo-home | yuck, cygwin python is teh evil. |
| 03:07 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 03:07 | garyo-home | I made it research. Next? |
| 03:07 | GregNoel | Who gets it? Steven? |
| 03:07 | bdbaddog | if you want to assign to me to research, that's fine. |
| 03:07 | GregNoel | OK, done |
| 03:08 | garyo-home | 1581 |
| 03:08 | GregNoel | P3 in 2.x? |
| 03:08 | bdbaddog | sounds good to me. |
| 03:08 | garyo-home | at least. This seems hard and not all that interesting. |
| 03:09 | GregNoel | OK, sounds good. |
| 03:09 | GregNoel | Next is 1727 |
| 03:09 | GregNoel | I have no clue |
| 03:09 | garyo-home | omg it's in Russian. |
| 03:10 | garyo-home | This one comes up on the list now & then. I bet it's a dup of something else, let me check. |
| 03:10 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 03:10 | GregNoel | Only the first part. Steven's response is clever. |
| 03:10 | bdbaddog | It may be part of a genrealized handling of long command lines for windows. |
| 03:10 | bdbaddog | I'm dealing with such at one of my clients with windows build now. |
| 03:11 | bdbaddog | not this specific one, but long command lines on win32. |
| 03:11 | garyo-home | 800 is also about long lines. |
| 03:12 | GregNoel | It's assigned to sbaranov, not a Tigris account; maybe Bill could contact him? |
| 03:12 | garyo-home | but it's not a dup. OK to move to research for 1721? |
| 03:13 | GregNoel | Yes, and 800 as well. Bill, can you take them? |
| 03:13 | garyo-home | ok, will do 800 now. |
| 03:13 | bdbaddog | ok. I'll make a note and try to contact the filer and assigned to. |
| 03:13 | garyo-home | Bill, what's your tigris login? |
| 03:14 | GregNoel | 1899, I think should be 0.xx or 1.0 |
| 03:14 | garyo-home | must be easy, right? |
| 03:14 | GregNoel | Hopefully, but it seems important |
| 03:15 | garyo-home | I think it's already done and the user's seeing a unicode problem. Just a guess. |
| 03:15 | bdbaddog | looks like there's changes already submited.. follow the urls. |
| 03:15 | garyo-home | OK I'll put it as 0.xx. |
| 03:15 | bdbaddog | sounds good. |
| 03:15 | GregNoel | 396 |
| 03:16 | garyo-home | nice enhancement but not for 1.0. |
| 03:16 | GregNoel | We know that relative paths are expensive to calculate in general, but for this specific case it might be feasible. |
| 03:16 | garyo-home | 1.x? |
| 03:16 | GregNoel | yes |
| 03:16 | bdbaddog | is that "polish" or featuer? |
| 03:16 | GregNoel | and P3 |
| 03:16 | bdbaddog | feature ? |
| 03:17 | GregNoel | yes |
| 03:17 | garyo-home | sorry, what? |
| 03:17 | GregNoel | Ur, I mean yes to both; it's fuzzy. |
| 03:17 | garyo-home | P3 I got. |
| 03:17 | garyo-home | oh I get it. I say it's a feature. |
| 03:18 | bdbaddog | o.k. and not a regression, if so I'd push to 2.x |
| 03:18 | garyo-home | Have to duck out for a couple of minutes. Be right back. |
| 03:18 | bdbaddog | ok |
| 03:19 | GregNoel | I could accept that. It comes in the category of "things that might be done while we're consolidating 1.0" |
| 03:19 | bdbaddog | so file 2.x and if it gets done, cool? |
| 03:20 | GregNoel | No, file 1.x and if it doesn't get done, push to 2.x |
| 03:20 | bdbaddog | :D |
| 03:20 | bdbaddog | I see we have opposite approaches.. |
| 03:20 | bdbaddog | This is a would be nice, but not a must have, right? |
| 03:20 | GregNoel | Maybe make it P4 so it's an obvious candidate |
| 03:21 | GregNoel | Gary, you seem to have the deciding opinion; are you back? |
| 03:22 | bdbaddog | That's just the approach I use on commercial projects. Works pretty well. |
| 03:22 | GregNoel | In the meantime, 1420 has two competing patches; maybe 1.x P3? |
| 03:22 | garyo-home | ok sorry, here I am |
| 03:22 | garyo-home | what's up? |
| 03:23 | GregNoel | Bill, promise them less and surprise them? |
| 03:23 | GregNoel | Gary, scroll back; you have a decision. |
| 03:23 | bdbaddog | Well focus on the must haves, and if you have time for the would be nice. pleasant surprise, but do what you say you will, is my approach. |
| 03:23 | garyo-home | We're on 396, right? It's 1.x vs 2.x? |
| 03:24 | GregNoel | yes |
| 03:24 | bdbaddog | Gary - basically if it's a would be nice do we push to the next further out marker. |
| 03:24 | bdbaddog | versus a must have. |
| 03:24 | garyo-home | Looks like a would-be-nice to me. |
| 03:24 | GregNoel | In FOSS, it's not as bad to get bumped |
| 03:24 | garyo-home | Right, someone can always submit a patch. |
| 03:25 | garyo-home | I'm going to put it in 2.x, P3. You guys start the next one. |
| 03:25 | bdbaddog | o.k. thanks. |
| 03:26 | GregNoel | With two patches, I say 1.x P3 |
| 03:26 | garyo-home | Oh yeah, this is a good one. People get bit by this. |
| 03:26 | bdbaddog | basically just needs some tests? |
| 03:26 | GregNoel | I haven't read the patches. |
| 03:26 | garyo-home | Greg, you've looked at this. 1.x P2? |
| 03:27 | bdbaddog | looks like there are tests in both patches, one is a lot simpler than the other looks like. but could be the amount of tests. |
| 03:27 | GregNoel | 1.x P3, but I'd buy P2 |
| 03:27 | garyo-home | ok done. |
| 03:27 | garyo-home | 1461 |
| 03:28 | GregNoel | 1461, no clue |
| 03:28 | GregNoel | Bypass and ask Steven when he shows? |
| 03:28 | garyo-home | ancient. Don't even know if it would still happen. Get more info? |
| 03:28 | jrandall | just tried it, still happens |
| 03:28 | GregNoel | yes |
| 03:28 | garyo-home | jrandall: you're fast! |
| 03:29 | garyo-home | would you make a note? |
| 03:29 | GregNoel | Hi, jrandall, glad to have you aboard |
| 03:29 | jrandall | cheated - went ahead on that as I was curious :) |
| 03:29 | jrandall | hello! |
| 03:29 | garyo-home | ok, I'll make a note to come back to 1461. |
| 03:29 | GregNoel | 1849 |
| 03:29 | garyo-home | 1849 |
| 03:30 | garyo-home | No Java fixes (or any tool) in 1.0, I say. |
| 03:30 | GregNoel | There's been some work with Java; this may be fixed. Research? |
| 03:30 | bdbaddog | yup. I'll try and get ahold of the filer. |
| 03:30 | garyo-home | OK. Steven already asked him for more info. |
| 03:31 | GregNoel | It may be the same as 1594 |
| 03:31 | bdbaddog | can just send him that we'll be closing the bug if we don't hear in N days? |
| 03:31 | garyo-home | right. 318 now? |
| 03:31 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: ok w/ me. |
| 03:31 | GregNoel | Or merge it into 1594 |
| 03:31 | bdbaddog | future |
| 03:31 | GregNoel | 318 1.x? |
| 03:31 | bdbaddog | for 318 |
| 03:32 | GregNoel | SCons is going to be torn up for 2.0, i18n may be reasonable to look at then |
| 03:32 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: can you take both 1594 & 1849, or should I merge them now? |
| 03:32 | garyo-home | Greg: right, no i18n now. |
| 03:33 | bdbaddog | sure. 1594 and 1849 |
| 03:33 | GregNoel | It's not clear they're the same issue, but probably. |
| 03:33 | bdbaddog | Should I modify 1594 then? |
| 03:33 | GregNoel | your choice. I tend to merge with the earliest. |
| 03:33 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: if you don't mind. |
| 03:33 | bdbaddog | done. |
| 03:34 | garyo-home | ok, 331 |
| 03:34 | GregNoel | not i18n now, but maybe look at it for 2.0, so 1.x |
| 03:34 | garyo-home | 331 -> 2.0 |
| 03:34 | bdbaddog | yup |
| 03:35 | GregNoel | 2.x, there's no 2.0 |
| 03:35 | garyo-home | 331 done. |
| 03:35 | bdbaddog | 340 future |
| 03:35 | GregNoel | ditto |
| 03:35 | garyo-home | yup. |
| 03:35 | bdbaddog | would be cool though.. |
| 03:35 | GregNoel | 345 future |
| 03:35 | bdbaddog | summer of code.. ;) |
| 03:36 | garyo-home | 345 done. 359? |
| 03:36 | bdbaddog | future |
| 03:36 | GregNoel | future |
| 03:36 | garyo-home | Someone was interested in jython. But future I say. |
| 03:37 | GregNoel | summer of code |
| 03:37 | bdbaddog | SOC. yes. |
| 03:37 | garyo-home | I put that in the comment. |
| 03:37 | bdbaddog | 362 2.x ? |
| 03:37 | GregNoel | I've got it as a note; 359 was already there; I'll add 345. |
| 03:37 | garyo-home | None of 362 seems at all important to me. 2.x if ever. |
| 03:38 | GregNoel | 362 2.x |
| 03:38 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 03:38 | bdbaddog | 388 2.x that is. |
| 03:38 | garyo-home | offtopic: it is annoying I have to enter a comment on each change. |
| 03:38 | GregNoel | 388 2.x |
| 03:38 | garyo-home | 388: agreed. |
| 03:39 | GregNoel | just make a list and do a mass change afterward |
| 03:39 | GregNoel | or one mass change for each category |
| 03:39 | bdbaddog | 389 2.x |
| 03:39 | GregNoel | 389 future |
| 03:39 | garyo-home | I"ve never tried mass change, but if it works I'll do that. |
| 03:40 | garyo-home | 389 is our stuff, Greg. |
| 03:40 | bdbaddog | yup. |
| 03:40 | GregNoel | take Tony off 389; he's not active any more exept as a moderator |
| 03:40 | GregNoel | Gary, yes, but we have no clue about the schedule for it yet |
| 03:41 | bdbaddog | but sometime, so I think it's o.k with 2.x |
| 03:41 | garyo-home | right. I'll put it there. |
| 03:41 | GregNoel | 583 is SoC, also TaskmasterNG |
| 03:41 | bdbaddog | o.k. cool. so 2.x ? |
| 03:42 | GregNoel | yes |
| 03:42 | garyo-home | I don't think 583 can really be done properly. |
| 03:42 | garyo-home | 583 -> future |
| 03:42 | bdbaddog | fine by me. 2.x or future, or never. |
| 03:42 | GregNoel | it can be done, and if you intend to include it from the begining, it's not hard |
| 03:42 | GregNoel | 2.x, give it to me |
| 03:43 | garyo-home | ok. |
| 03:43 | bdbaddog | 590 2.x |
| 03:43 | garyo-home | I think 590 is done, I'm closing it. It's mine anyway. |
| 03:43 | GregNoel | 590 is INVALID; Gary, you want to do the honors? |
| 03:44 | GregNoel | Geeze, everybody types faster than me |
| 03:44 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 03:44 | GregNoel | 1295 |
| 03:44 | jrandall | I put a note in this one. I give good odds it's fixed already |
| 03:45 | GregNoel | Maybe 1.x, but I could be persuaded |
| 03:45 | garyo-home | research, then either already done or 1.x? |
| 03:45 | bdbaddog | if it's not fixed, push to 2.0 |
| 03:45 | bdbaddog | research. yes. |
| 03:45 | garyo-home | done |
| 03:45 | GregNoel | research by jrandall. see what you get? |
| 03:45 | jrandall | OK |
| 03:46 | GregNoel | 1413, no clue |
| 03:46 | bdbaddog | this is when you isntall as not an administrator. |
| 03:46 | garyo-home | duh. |
| 03:46 | bdbaddog | and you are presented option to select install dir, 90% sure of that. |
| 03:46 | garyo-home | 2.x or future? |
| 03:47 | bdbaddog | or roll in with the stand alone. |
| 03:47 | bdbaddog | yes. 2.x |
| 03:47 | bdbaddog | New installer would be good in 2.x timeframe. |
| 03:47 | GregNoel | "standalone" one word |
| 03:47 | garyo-home | +1 on new installer someday. |
| 03:47 | bdbaddog | where x != 0 |
| 03:47 | garyo-home | ok. |
| 03:48 | GregNoel | 1423 |
| 03:48 | garyo-home | 1423: need a test case. |
| 03:48 | bdbaddog | I think this is like running .configure, and not make distclean.. |
| 03:49 | bdbaddog | and expecting it to regenerate cached values ? |
| 03:49 | GregNoel | 2.x possibly 1.x |
| 03:49 | garyo-home | blkdog: it's actually happened before to me, I think there is a bug in there somewhere. |
| 03:49 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 03:49 | garyo-home | ok, 2.x it is |
| 03:49 | GregNoel | 1429, 2.x maybe 1.x |
| 03:50 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 03:50 | garyo-home | sorry guys, another interruption, please keep going. |
| 03:50 | GregNoel | There's an easy workaround, so 2.x |
| 03:50 | bdbaddog | yup. |
| 03:51 | GregNoel | 1752 may be fixed |
| 03:51 | bdbaddog | gimme a sec. I'll try it. |
| 03:51 | GregNoel | OK, research by Bill it is. |
| 03:51 | GregNoel | If nothing else, it's probably a dup of 1699 |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | testcase doesn't work. |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | in latest svn. |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | scons: Reading SConscript files ... |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | TypeError: Clean() takes exactly 3 arguments (2 given): |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | File "/home/bdbaddog/1752/SConstruct", line 5: |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | Clean("install") |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | File "/home/bdbaddog/tools/stow/scons-svn/lib/scons-0.97.0d20080317/SCons/Script/SConscript.py", line 596: |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | return apply(method, args, kw) |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | research. |
| 03:52 | GregNoel | env.Clean() |
| 03:52 | bdbaddog | I'll take a look at it. |
| 03:53 | GregNoel | Also 1699? |
| 03:53 | bdbaddog | TypeError: Clean() takes exactly 3 arguments (2 given): |
| 03:53 | garyo-home | ok sorry about that, glad I don't work from home. :-) |
| 03:54 | garyo-home | 1429 -> 2.x, 1752 -> research, right? |
| 03:54 | GregNoel | Except that she's offered pizza, I'd have tied down my wife... |
| 03:54 | GregNoel | And 1699 may be a dup of 1752 |
| 03:54 | garyo-home | I don't believe that for a second, Greg. |
| 03:54 | bdbaddog | I'll research 1699 and 1752 |
| 03:55 | garyo-home | OK, can you make the mods to those issues then? |
| 03:55 | bdbaddog | yup |
| 03:55 | GregNoel | That's why I said "may" |
| 03:55 | GregNoel | 1848 is multiple bugs |
| 03:56 | GregNoel | I suggest Steven to research. He's not here, so he can't complain. |
| 03:56 | garyo-home | No, I know what 1848 is, it's an alias that conflicts with a filename. |
| 03:57 | garyo-home | Workaround is to use Alias('hello') where you mean the alias. |
| 03:57 | garyo-home | Or File() or the builder result where you mean the file. |
| 03:57 | GregNoel | Yes, but there are multiple problems in the bug |
| 03:57 | garyo-home | They're all the same, I think. I'll take it as research. |
| 03:57 | GregNoel | ok |
| 03:58 | GregNoel | 1922 is resolved |
| 03:58 | garyo-home | done. |
| 03:58 | bdbaddog | my list just went away,... next is gone. |
| 03:58 | garyo-home | 1526 I think |
| 03:58 | GregNoel | 1526 should be 0.xx {;-} |
| 03:59 | bdbaddog | ok .got it again. |
| 03:59 | bdbaddog | feature right? |
| 03:59 | garyo-home | sure Greg. |
| 03:59 | garyo-home | :-) |
| 03:59 | jrandall | has the most votes you know :) |
| 03:59 | GregNoel | basis for many other features |
| 03:59 | bdbaddog | It does sound useful though.. |
| 03:59 | bdbaddog | but I think 2.x |
| 04:00 | GregNoel | including new configure, Gary |
| 04:00 | garyo-home | 1.x at least, or 2.x. Yes, might interact w/ new toolchain/tool-config stuff indeed. How about I say 1.x for now? |
| 04:00 | GregNoel | K |
| 04:00 | bdbaddog | 2.x or punt til steven gets online.. |
| 04:01 | garyo-home | made a note to ask him about it |
| 04:01 | bdbaddog | k next. |
| 04:01 | GregNoel | 1839 |
| 04:02 | garyo-home | I've seen this too, on a 2-cpu linux box. |
| 04:02 | GregNoel | I know Steven worried about this, but it looks like INVALID to me. |
| 04:02 | bdbaddog | do you need to eat up all the available processes to get this? |
| 04:02 | garyo-home | I think I had to trap that errno and return success (which wasn't really right so I didn't submit it) |
| 04:02 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: no I don't think so. |
| 04:03 | bdbaddog | how do you reproduce the problem? |
| 04:03 | garyo-home | I thought it was the subprocess returning so fast the wait logic got confused. |
| 04:03 | garyo-home | repro: a big build with lots of stuff going on, and -jN. |
| 04:03 | bdbaddog | on linux? |
| 04:04 | garyo-home | Yes. Actually looking at the last comment, maybe my bug was different? I don't use backtick. |
| 04:04 | bdbaddog | is there a known fix? |
| 04:04 | garyo-home | In any case we can't do anything about it for 1.0. |
| 04:04 | bdbaddog | yeah. that's what I'm thinking. |
| 04:04 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:05 | garyo-home | Not for mine, I rerun the build. And it hasn't happened to me in a long time. |
| 04:05 | garyo-home | ok 1839 -> 2.x. |
| 04:05 | garyo-home | 1633 |
| 04:05 | GregNoel | 1633 just showed up on the mailing list again today, 1.x? |
| 04:06 | garyo-home | Why is this not the same as Depends? |
| 04:06 | GregNoel | If you don't have a scanner that works, what's the workaround? |
| 04:06 | bdbaddog | punt til steven comes online, looks like he's worked on it a bit. |
| 04:06 | GregNoel | No, it's not a dependency; it's like an #include in a source file |
| 04:07 | garyo-home | So the dependency gets scanned, that's the behavior that differs? |
| 04:07 | GregNoel | What scanner for Te |
| 04:07 | GregNoel | What scanner for TeX was that? |
| 04:07 | bdbaddog | I'm sure Steven can explain when he gets online.. |
| 04:08 | garyo-home | ok, I'll defer it. But we still aren't going to do it for 1.0. |
| 04:08 | bdbaddog | true. |
| 04:08 | GregNoel | I'd say 1.x |
| 04:08 | bdbaddog | 2.x ping Steven Later for details? |
| 04:08 | GregNoel | 1.x |
| 04:08 | bdbaddog | feature. not a bug. I'd say 2.x |
| 04:09 | garyo-home | It's on the "revisit with Steven" list for now, let's move on. |
| 04:09 | GregNoel | 1086 |
| 04:09 | garyo-home | 1086 is batch builders, a wonderful idea for 2.x. |
| 04:09 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:09 | GregNoel | It's a SoC; 2.x is fine. |
| 04:09 | bdbaddog | It will make one of my clients very happy. |
| 04:09 | garyo-home | :-) |
| 04:10 | GregNoel | decision? |
| 04:10 | bdbaddog | 1671 looks like part of the great tool refactoring? |
| 04:10 | bdbaddog | 2.x for 1086 |
| 04:10 | garyo-home | 1671 is a toolchain one, yes. |
| 04:10 | bdbaddog | 1671 2.x |
| 04:10 | garyo-home | 2.x for 1086 and 1671. |
| 04:10 | GregNoel | Steven should have something to say |
| 04:10 | garyo-home | (or maybe pre-2.0, it's important -- but not 1.0) |
| 04:11 | bdbaddog | should make a note to wrap up the tool realated bugs into one umbrella to tie them together. |
| 04:11 | garyo-home | 1671 I mean |
| 04:11 | GregNoel | 1.x? |
| 04:11 | GregNoel | and revisit? |
| 04:11 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:11 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: I created a "tool" subcategory this morning for this. |
| 04:11 | bdbaddog | O.k. cool. |
| 04:12 | GregNoel | decision? |
| 04:12 | garyo-home | ok 1671 is 1.x for now so we are forced to think about it then. |
| 04:12 | bdbaddog | I'd disagree. |
| 04:12 | GregNoel | Oh, 1671 is a dup of 1007, so it's been around |
| 04:12 | bdbaddog | feels like a feature. better tool messaging. |
| 04:13 | GregNoel | feels like a bug if it bites you. |
| 04:13 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 04:13 | bdbaddog | but it never worked before.. |
| 04:13 | garyo-home | Greg's right about that, but the right way to fix it is to refactor (feature) |
| 04:13 | GregNoel | Even worse, it leads to silent failures |
| 04:14 | bdbaddog | I'm voting 2.x, we can punt til Steven's online to get his opinion and move on. |
| 04:14 | garyo-home | I think since Greg & I are working on it (in theory) it's possible to get it in soonish. I'll mark it as disputed. |
| 04:14 | GregNoel | Yes, revisit with Steven |
| 04:14 | -!- | stevenknight [n=stevenkn@c-24-4-99-215.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scons |
| 04:14 | bdbaddog | speaking of the devil...;) |
| 04:14 | stevenknight | yo |
| 04:14 | garyo-home | Hi Steven! |
| 04:14 | bdbaddog | 17 in rush hour fun I guess. |
| 04:15 | GregNoel | Uh, it isn't our stuff; this is different |
| 04:15 | GregNoel | Ho, Steven |
| 04:15 | stevenknight | no, it was the fact that SJC now has all their restaurants and stuff behind the security gate |
| 04:15 | stevenknight | didn't last time I was there |
| 04:15 | stevenknight | lost time parking, going in, etc. |
| 04:15 | stevenknight | gah |
| 04:15 | bdbaddog | oh boy. |
| 04:15 | bdbaddog | well now for something stress free.. |
| 04:15 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 04:15 | garyo-home | ah well. We have a short list of deferred issues for you, otherwise we're up to 1912. |
| 04:15 | stevenknight | cool |
| 04:16 | garyo-home | Can we do the deferred ones now? |
| 04:16 | stevenknight | i'm okay with it |
| 04:16 | garyo-home | 1461, 1526, 1633, 1671 |
| 04:16 | bdbaddog | may as well. they'll be higher priorities than later ones. |
| 04:17 | GregNoel | 1461 |
| 04:17 | garyo-home | 1461: wtf? 1526: entry pt refactor 1633 and 1671: dispute re: 1.x or 2.x. |
| 04:17 | garyo-home | yes, 1461 first. |
| 04:17 | garyo-home | Steven: none of us understand this one. |
| 04:18 | stevenknight | i seem to have net lag to tigris.org |
| 04:18 | stevenknight | hang on... |
| 04:18 | GregNoel | Er, I understand 1461, but I don't know how hard the fix is |
| 04:18 | garyo-home | ok |
| 04:19 | stevenknight | 1461: probably pretty hairy |
| 04:19 | garyo-home | Using mkdir in an action is not elementary |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | it touches on the fact that Dir nodes are kind of like other nodes in that we want to be able to treat them as targets |
| 04:20 | garyo-home | ok, so 1461 -> 2.x? |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | but they also get treated differently if they're created as part of making room for some other target |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | yeah, no reason to hold 1.0 for it |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | probably won't happen |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | by then |
| 04:20 | garyo-home | (Steven, I'm making a list of changes which I'll apply in batch to Tigris later.) |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | (cool, thanks) |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | 1526: |
| 04:20 | garyo-home | ok, 1526 then |
| 04:20 | stevenknight | net lag... |
| 04:21 | garyo-home | Greg wants scons entry points refactored |
| 04:21 | bdbaddog | I was sugguesting 2.x rather than 1.x |
| 04:21 | * | GregNoel is staying mum |
| 04:21 | jrandall | *** as is jrandall |
| 04:22 | bdbaddog | reasoning being, feels like a feature, so push to 2.x |
| 04:22 | stevenknight | ah, 1526...! |
| 04:22 | stevenknight | there was one brief moment where I felt like I understood the underlying intent in a way that translated to a real API |
| 04:23 | stevenknight | but I lost it quite awhile ago |
| 04:23 | GregNoel | (;) |
| 04:23 | stevenknight | it's probably not hard if Greg and I work out the specifics |
| 04:23 | stevenknight | THAT would be the trick... :-) |
| 04:23 | bdbaddog | :) |
| 04:23 | GregNoel | I'm willing |
| 04:23 | stevenknight | can we put it on a maybe-for-1.0 and Greg and I try to work it into shape off line? |
| 04:23 | bdbaddog | Yeah.I'm just sugguesting that (to counter your fore-stated predilection of putting one more feature in), to push features to 2.x, and if they get done earlier then cool. |
| 04:24 | garyo-home | Not 1.0, but 1.x? |
| 04:24 | GregNoel | 1.x |
| 04:24 | stevenknight | 1.x |
| 04:24 | garyo-home | ok, and if it doesn't get done, then no big deal. |
| 04:24 | GregNoel | yes |
| 04:24 | stevenknight | 1633: (pre-loaded while working on the others) |
| 04:24 | GregNoel | Includes() is not Depends() |
| 04:25 | stevenknight | this looked like it was going to be easy, but started getting hairy |
| 04:25 | garyo-home | ... because it scans the dependency. |
| 04:25 | stevenknight | right |
| 04:25 | stevenknight | Joseph's last suggestion should be tried |
| 04:25 | garyo-home | I say feature therefore 2.x. |
| 04:25 | garyo-home | steven: well, that would be easy... |
| 04:25 | GregNoel | I saw it as something that acted as if it were scanned in. |
| 04:26 | stevenknight | hmm, yeah, 2.x |
| 04:26 | garyo-home | ok, done. |
| 04:26 | stevenknight | it's another one I'd really like to get in, too |
| 04:26 | bdbaddog | so this would be used when theres no scanner or the scanner isn't 100% ? |
| 04:26 | stevenknight | but i'm trying to be good... :-) |
| 04:26 | GregNoel | 1671 and 1007 |
| 04:26 | stevenknight | yeah, the situation I envisioned is you have a one-off and you don't want to write a scanner for it |
| 04:26 | bdbaddog | 1671 is another feels like a feature, it's not a regression, |
| 04:26 | stevenknight | if you know the dependency, it would let you just hard-wire it |
| 04:27 | stevenknight | 1671: boy, i'm torn on this one |
| 04:27 | stevenknight | i hoped the ToolInitializer stuff would permit this |
| 04:27 | garyo-home | The right way to fix it is the toolchain stuff Greg and I are working on. |
| 04:27 | GregNoel | Er, not the same |
| 04:27 | garyo-home | It's important but nontrivial. |
| 04:27 | bdbaddog | Greg and Gary are doing tool refactor, but that's unlikely to be in the next month right? |
| 04:27 | stevenknight | it really sucks that we only give people an impenetrable AttributeError in this case |
| 04:27 | stevenknight | but ToolInitializer drags in a whole bunch of other issues |
| 04:28 | garyo-home | bdbaddog: not next month for sure. |
| 04:28 | GregNoel | This isn't Tool refactor! |
| 04:28 | * | stevenknight agrees w/garyo-home re: nontrivial |
| 04:28 | garyo-home | Greg: it's not the tool refactor but that would fix it, right? |
| 04:28 | GregNoel | no |
| 04:28 | stevenknight | does it or doesn't it line up with the toolchain stuff? Gary seemed to say yes but Greg disagreed? |
| 04:28 | bdbaddog | I say put to 2.x, when it can be part of the tool solution? |
| 04:29 | stevenknight | what are we treating as the difference between 1.x and 2.x? |
| 04:29 | garyo-home | ok Greg, maybe toolchain doesn't *always* fix it, story too long to be told here & now. |
| 04:29 | GregNoel | 1.x should be done before 2.0, in some order |
| 04:29 | stevenknight | that's it? then i'd vote 1.x on this one |
| 04:29 | bdbaddog | 1.x is polish on 1.0, 2.x should be new features. |
| 04:30 | GregNoel | "be flexible" |
| 04:30 | garyo-home | what bdbaddog said. |
| 04:30 | stevenknight | yeah, polish |
| 04:30 | bdbaddog | 1.xIssues that should be resolved during the 1.x release cycles. Since the 1.x cycle will be fairly short, these will probably focus on |
| 04:30 | stevenknight | agreed re: flexible, too |
| 04:30 | garyo-home | ok, so? |
| 04:30 | stevenknight | so i'd vote 1.x, and we can alway reclassify 2.x if that looks non-viable, yes? |
| 04:30 | GregNoel | yes |
| 04:31 | stevenknight | okay, 1.x |
| 04:31 | garyo-home | usually I'd say push the feature out, but this one bites *so* many people. |
| 04:31 | bdbaddog | I'll still vote 2.x, but defer to greater numbers. |
| 04:31 | stevenknight | right |
| 04:31 | garyo-home | 1.x it is then. |
| 04:31 | garyo-home | Now we're back to the regular list. |
| 04:31 | GregNoel | 1913, C# |
| 04:31 | garyo-home | 1912 I think? |
| 04:31 | GregNoel | oops, 1912 |
| 04:31 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:31 | garyo-home | 2.x |
| 04:31 | GregNoel | 2.x |
| 04:32 | stevenknight | we're going in top-voted order? |
| 04:32 | stevenknight | 2.x |
| 04:32 | GregNoel | "be flexible" consensus |
| 04:32 | GregNoel | 1917 is a dup and should be gone |
| 04:32 | GregNoel | 589? |
| 04:33 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:33 | garyo-home | steven: order is priority, go to http://www.scons.org/wiki/BugParty & click there. |
| 04:33 | garyo-home | 589 is next, yes? |
| 04:33 | bdbaddog | yes. |
| 04:33 | GregNoel | 2.x |
| 04:33 | bdbaddog | or future.. needs python 2.3 |
| 04:34 | GregNoel | That can be retrofitted, I think |
| 04:34 | garyo-home | ok, 2.x then? |
| 04:34 | bdbaddog | yup. |
| 04:34 | GregNoel | 1228 |
| 04:34 | GregNoel | Another new config issue |
| 04:34 | garyo-home | did I miss 1217? |
| 04:35 | GregNoel | dup |
| 04:35 | garyo-home | ok |
| 04:35 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:35 | garyo-home | 2.x tools |
| 04:35 | bdbaddog | 1228 2.x that is (I'd vote for it.. ) |
| 04:35 | GregNoel | I'll add a "new config" keyword for these issues |
| 04:36 | stevenknight | 1228: 2.x |
| 04:36 | garyo-home | don't call it config though please, how about toolchain |
| 04:36 | GregNoel | 1938 |
| 04:36 | GregNoel | ok |
| 04:37 | bdbaddog | Jim u going to chime in on this one? ;) |
| 04:37 | GregNoel | I've looked at this; it's a grotty problem |
| 04:37 | jrandall | ay e- would love to see this fixed if possible |
| 04:37 | bdbaddog | o.k. ugly problem either 2.x or 1.x |
| 04:37 | bdbaddog | though it looks like its a regression. |
| 04:38 | garyo-home | we need a milestone for "try for 1.x else 2.x" |
| 04:38 | stevenknight | still loading for me: this is how multiple targets get the same MD5 in the cache, yes? |
| 04:38 | bdbaddog | I though all 2.x's would get tried for 1.x.. |
| 04:38 | GregNoel | Gary, 1.x P4 |
| 04:38 | GregNoel | or even P5 |
| 04:38 | garyo-home | 1.x p4 I can live with. |
| 04:38 | stevenknight | ah, no, just got it up |
| 04:38 | GregNoel | Bill, only if we run out of 1.x |
| 04:39 | jrandall | this makes it hard to use implicit-cache, which is a bummer |
| 04:39 | bdbaddog | exactly. |
| 04:39 | stevenknight | 1938: 1.x |
| 04:39 | garyo-home | ok done. |
| 04:39 | bdbaddog | 417 future. |
| 04:39 | GregNoel | 417 |
| 04:39 | garyo-home | 417 (then 1465, Steven) |
| 04:39 | stevenknight | 417 future |
| 04:39 | GregNoel | future |
| 04:39 | garyo-home | future ok, done. |
| 04:40 | GregNoel | if we keep it at all |
| 04:40 | garyo-home | 1465? |
| 04:40 | GregNoel | no clue |
| 04:40 | stevenknight | 1465: 1.x |
| 04:40 | garyo-home | This is a tool thing, it's nice, not too hard but should be 2.x. |
| 04:40 | bdbaddog | 2.x |
| 04:40 | stevenknight | unless someone else knows that patch better and wants to take it on |
| 04:40 | garyo-home | I'll take this one, I do this kind of thing in real life |
| 04:41 | GregNoel | 1678? |
| 04:41 | stevenknight | for 1.x? |
| 04:41 | GregNoel | yes |
| 04:41 | stevenknight | k |
| 04:41 | GregNoel | There's a wiki page on it; we should talk |
| 04:41 | stevenknight | 1678: how close does Maciej's stuff bring us to this? |
| 04:42 | stevenknight | I think it comes in whenever that does |
| 04:42 |
