Please note:The SCons wiki is now restored from the attack in March 2013. All old passwords have been invalidated. Please reset your password if you have an account. If you note missing pages, please report them to webmaster@scons.org. Also, new account creation is currently disabled due to an ongoing spam flood (2013/08/27).
   1 16:23:54 *      bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-71-131-1-136.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #scons
   2 16:59:39 *      jrandall (n=jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca) has joined #scons
   3 17:00:32 <GregoryNoel>  Steven and Gary have said they will be late; who else is here for the bug party?
   4 17:00:52 <GregoryNoel>  And Gary may not make it at all.
   5 17:01:18 <jrandall>     here, but after looking through the current list of bugs, there's not a lot I have to add to them
   6 17:01:40 <jrandall>     Had a hard time getting into 2007Q3.   Any known problem with that spreadsheet?
   7 17:02:08 <GregoryNoel>  No, just the usual.  Nobody has figured out the exact magic needed.
   8 17:03:00 <jrandall>     Hrm, I had it opened view-only in another tab, maybe that vexed it for some reason.   I'll try again later to see if it likes me then
   9 17:03:24 <GregoryNoel>  Apparently, that's one no-no.
  10 17:03:55 <GregoryNoel>  Could you add that note to the ReadWrite page?
  11 17:04:00 <jrandall>     Sure thing
  12 17:04:44 <GregoryNoel>  Bill, are you there?  Or was that an automatic connection?
  13 17:06:40 <GregoryNoel>  Apparently not.  Only two isn't a quorum, but we can wait a bit and see if Steven or Gary show up.
  14 17:06:48 <jrandall>     Sure thing
  15 17:06:48 *      chit-chat while wating for quorum
  16 17:12:54 *      stevenknight (n=stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #scons
  17 17:13:12 <stevenknight> hi, who's here?
  18 17:13:23 <GregoryNoel>  nobody
  19 17:13:31 <stevenknight> damn
  20 17:13:39 <jrandall>     aye, 'tis quiet
  21 17:14:11 <GregoryNoel>  Gary is caught at work and may not make it.
  22 17:16:43 <bdbaddog>     Hi All. I'm here til about 5:30ish.
  23 17:17:00 <stevenknight> hi bill
  24 17:17:09 <bdbaddog>     Good Day!
  25 17:17:31 <GregoryNoel>  Hey, Bill.
  26 17:17:13 <stevenknight> i just got connected myself, shall we dive into the current issues?
  27 17:17:39 <GregoryNoel>  Sure
  28 17:17:38 <stevenknight> 2073:  moot, already fixed
  29 17:17:56 <stevenknight> 2074:  consensus 2.x p2
  30 17:18:14 <stevenknight> 2076:  consensus 1.x p1
  31 17:18:43 <GregoryNoel>  Geeze, let me catch up.
  32 17:19:20 <GregoryNoel>  2074, 2076, done
  33 17:19:30 <GregoryNoel>  2077
  34 17:19:37 <stevenknight> oh, 2076:  we should assign to someone, yes?
  35 17:19:54 <GregoryNoel>  Assign Bill
  36 17:20:01 <stevenknight> works for me
  37 17:20:10 <bdbaddog>     oh boy. imagine if I wasn't here.. ;)
  38 17:20:17 <stevenknight> 2077:  consensus 1.x
  39 17:20:28 <stevenknight> two votes (kind of) for p4, any objections?
  40 17:20:43 <GregoryNoel>  Er, 2077 assign Bill; I'll look at 2076
  41 17:20:56 <stevenknight> okay
  42 17:20:57 <GregoryNoel>  unless Bill wants it
  43 17:21:35 <bdbaddog>     nope. but I'll take a look at 2077. might be 2 weeks as I have trade show next week, before I get a chance.
  44 17:21:45 <stevenknight> done
  45 17:21:47 <GregoryNoel>  done
  46 17:22:03 <stevenknight> 2078:  1.x, p2, me (along with other Visual Studio / VC work)
  47 17:22:21 <GregoryNoel>  ok
  48 17:22:39 <stevenknight> (the reprioritization after 1.0 is released is going to be fun...)
  49 17:22:49 <stevenknight> 2079:  2.x, greg?
  50 17:23:05 <GregoryNoel>  Hmmm...  OK, I guess
  51 17:23:14 <GregoryNoel>  what priority?
  52 17:23:28 <stevenknight> sounds like you have a handle on it
  53 17:23:37 <stevenknight> I don't quite grok why a File.Grep() method
  54 17:23:54 <bdbaddog>     it's like Glob() but with regular expressions..
  55 17:24:00 <GregoryNoel>  It's not obvious when to use f.name and str(f)
  56 17:24:09 <stevenknight> as opposed to some more generic method that might also grep for Dir, Alias, Value...
  57 17:24:27 <GregoryNoel>  No, no, no, it looks at file contents.
  58 17:24:39 <stevenknight> ah
  59 17:24:41 <GregoryNoel>  Like a scanner.
  60 17:24:50 <bdbaddog>     oh. I thought from the emails, the requestor wanted to grep the file names,not contents.
  61 17:25:10 <stevenknight> yeah, like Filter (and FilterOut) in Ant
  62 17:25:25 <GregoryNoel>  No, he wanted to scan for 'int main(' to locate the main programs
  63 17:25:28 <bdbaddog>     o.k. never mind just reread.
  64 17:25:44 <GregoryNoel>  Maybe those are better names (FilterIn/Out)
  65 17:25:55 <stevenknight> well, they imply matching names, not file contents
  66 17:26:02 <GregoryNoel>  Ah, true.
  67 17:26:05 <bdbaddog>     yes. sounds clearer, Grep makes me think Glob but Regex.
  68 17:26:13 <stevenknight> i guess rather than add a special method (IMHO)
  69 17:26:40 <GregoryNoel>  (yes?)
  70 17:26:47 <stevenknight> i'm more interested in giving File nodes a read() method
  71 17:26:57 <GregoryNoel>  Hmmmm......
  72 17:26:58 <stevenknight> that looks like normal Python file objects
  73 17:26:59 <bdbaddog>     ahh. I like that even more.
  74 17:27:12 <GregoryNoel>  I think I do, too
  75 17:27:14 <stevenknight> and then let people manipulate f1.read() using normal Python
  76 17:27:41 <GregoryNoel>  Yes, good idea.  I'll write it up that way.
  77 17:27:49 <stevenknight> okay, thanks
  78 17:27:57 <GregoryNoel>  next?
  79 17:28:16 <stevenknight> 2080:  TASK
  80 17:28:32 <stevenknight> i forget, how are we marking items like this?  1.0 and just move them along?
  81 17:28:39 <stevenknight> i.e., things that can be done any time
  82 17:28:42 <GregoryNoel>  How about David as a release team member?
  83 17:28:50 <stevenknight> ++
  84 17:28:58 <bdbaddog>     I think he said he didn't have enough time though.
  85 17:29:03 <GregoryNoel>  No, I make up something
  86 17:29:48 <stevenknight> ??
  87 17:29:48 <GregoryNoel>  I don't think being on the mailing list would be a problem; I'd appreciate his insight for the spreadsheets.
  88 17:30:07 <stevenknight> agreed
  89 17:30:12 <bdbaddog>     sounds good.
  90 17:30:40 <GregoryNoel>  "make up something" === try to guess when it would be done; it's what the not-research items should be.
  91 17:30:54 <stevenknight> okay
  92 17:31:17 <stevenknight> 2081:  consensus 1.x p2
  93 17:31:29 <GregoryNoel>  I can create something for backburner issues, but "backburner" is not a name that delights me.
  94 17:31:51 <stevenknight> "backburner" to me would be implied by the priority
  95 17:32:02 <stevenknight> since the target milestone is really about timeframe
  96 17:32:07 <stevenknight> how about an explicit "anytime"
  97 17:32:09 <stevenknight> ?
  98 17:32:20 <GregoryNoel>  Hmmm....  I'll look at that
  99 17:32:24 <stevenknight> okay
 100 17:32:34 <GregoryNoel>  2081: done
 101 17:33:12 <GregoryNoel>  2082: split between p2 and p4
 102 17:33:15 <stevenknight> 2082:  i meant 1.x
 103 17:33:18 <GregoryNoel>  (both 1.x)
 104 17:33:41 <stevenknight> so 1.x, and p3? (split the difference)
 105 17:33:47 <bdbaddog>     Looks like just needs some tests to be able to be applied right?
 106 17:33:56 <bdbaddog>     Do we have much coverage on rc files?
 107 17:34:18 <stevenknight> not a lot
 108 17:34:23 <stevenknight> i was just dealing with rc file today
 109 17:34:34 <stevenknight> so i'd put my name on this one, too
 110 17:34:39 <GregoryNoel>  works
 111 17:35:03 <bdbaddog>     O.k I"m a pumpkin. I've gotta head to class.
 112 17:35:04 <stevenknight> 2083:  looks like consensus 1.x p2
 113 17:35:08 <bdbaddog>     Good evening to all.
 114 17:35:10 <stevenknight> later
 115 17:35:13 *      bdbaddog has quit ("Leaving.")
 116 17:36:05 <GregoryNoel>  2083: yeah, but we need to talk about the model.
 117 17:36:16 <stevenknight> fire away
 118 17:36:28 <stevenknight> or did you mean on the ML?
 119 17:36:25 <GregoryNoel>  Maybe not right now, but there needs to be some agreement on how to do it.
 120 17:36:45 <stevenknight> okay
 121 17:37:09 <GregoryNoel>  ML would be fine; the last time I wrote a suggestion about it, it just died away, and I still don't have any real ideas
 122 17:37:34 <stevenknight> yeah, i may be the only one who cares about it in practice
 123 17:37:44 <stevenknight> purely because of wanting to do everything that Make does... :-)
 124 17:37:46 <GregoryNoel>  No, I do
 125 17:37:58 <stevenknight> no, i mean cares whether there is a mechanism that works
 126 17:38:06 <stevenknight> i think most people want it to just go away... :-)
 127 17:38:05 <GregoryNoel>  The real problem is less-than-clean removals
 128 17:38:17 <stevenknight> ah, right
 129 17:39:08 <GregoryNoel>  If it were only creating "cleaner" levels, it would be easy, but you want to be able to clean out, say, just the intermediate files
 130 17:39:17 <stevenknight> right
 131 17:39:40 <GregoryNoel>  I just don't have any good idea for how to do thatt.
 132 17:39:45 <stevenknight> so for now:  1.x, p2, and either you or I to lead discussion (even if it's just between the two of us)?
 133 17:39:52 <GregoryNoel>  works
 134 17:40:03 <stevenknight> either that or "research" since we're still not sure
 135 17:40:23 <stevenknight> your choice, 1.x or research
 136 17:40:48 <GregoryNoel>  1.x; that'll force us to look at it at a specific time
 137 17:40:52 <stevenknight> good
 138 17:41:02 <stevenknight> 2084:  i'm clueless
 139 17:41:07 <GregoryNoel>  2084, where's Gary?
 140 17:41:17 <stevenknight> we could make it research, garyo
 141 17:41:29 <stevenknight> just so he doesn't escape completely unscathed by not showing up...  :-)
 142 17:41:35 <GregoryNoel>  I'll buy that!
 143 17:41:43 <stevenknight> done
 144 17:41:49 <jrandall>     lol
 145 17:42:20 <stevenknight> 2085:  1.0, p4 (split difference), me
 146 17:42:28 <GregoryNoel>  done
 147 17:42:53 <stevenknight> i have doc changes teed up for once i get 0.98.5 out (I hope later this evening, this past weekend was overrun by daughter's birthday)
 148 17:43:12 <GregoryNoel>  Happy birthday; daughters are dangerous
 149 17:43:30 <stevenknight> oh my goodness yes
 150 17:43:34 <GregoryNoel>  how old?
 151 17:43:39 <stevenknight> 10
 152 17:43:44 <GregoryNoel>  ouch!
 153 17:44:05 <GregoryNoel>  I remember my niece at ten....  oh, my, are you in for it!
 154 17:44:25 <stevenknight> yeah, I'm right on the cusp of going from being cool Dad to the biggest dork in the world
 155 17:44:46 <stevenknight> mind you, that last bit isn't much of a stretch...
 156 17:45:20 <stevenknight> anyway, 2007 q2?
 157 17:45:32 <GregoryNoel>  er, q3?
 158 17:45:41 <stevenknight> oh, right, q3
 159 17:45:48 <stevenknight> i was working ahead a little on q2
 160 17:46:20 <GregoryNoel>  1869
 161 17:46:51 <stevenknight> ?
 162 17:46:55 <stevenknight> i have 1687 as the first?
 163 17:47:01 <GregoryNoel>  fixed
 164 17:47:08 <stevenknight> ah
 165 17:47:39 <stevenknight> 1689:  consensus 1.x,
 166 17:47:55 <stevenknight> p2?
 167 17:48:14 <GregoryNoel>  Another one that needs some discussion after a bit of research, but
 168 17:48:27 <GregoryNoel>  p2 is a reasonable time to do it.
 169 17:48:27 <stevenknight> right
 170 17:48:43 <GregoryNoel>  OK, done
 171 17:49:08 <stevenknight> assign to...?  you (maybe ParseConfig), me (I might know what's going on), leave blank for now?
 172 17:49:41 <GregoryNoel>  blank, actually issues@scons
 173 17:49:55 <stevenknight> okay
 174 17:50:09 <GregoryNoel>  I don't think it was backtick
 175 17:50:27 <stevenknight> maybe not
 176 17:50:04 <stevenknight> 1690:  research, me (Visual Studio stuff)
 177 17:50:40 <GregoryNoel>  1690, done
 178 17:50:52 <stevenknight> 1691:  documentation, 1.0, me
 179 17:51:14 <GregoryNoel>  done
 180 17:51:28 <stevenknight> 1692:  research, me (Visual Studio again)
 181 17:51:29 <GregoryNoel>  may need to follow up to see what the message was
 182 17:51:40 <GregoryNoel>  1692, done
 183 17:51:52 <stevenknight> 1693:  consensus 1.x p2
 184 17:52:08 <GregoryNoel>  done
 185 17:52:09 <stevenknight> good manageable bug for someone else to take
 186 17:52:15 <GregoryNoel>  yes
 187 17:52:28 <stevenknight> 1697:  research, me (Visual Studio)
 188 17:52:47 <GregoryNoel>  okay
 189 17:53:16 <GregoryNoel>  1701, ditto
 190 17:53:17 <stevenknight> 1701:  research, me (Visual Studio)
 191 17:53:19 <stevenknight> right
 192 17:53:20 <GregoryNoel>  done
 193 17:53:34 <stevenknight> it isn't the pipes thing, it has to do with how we look in the #*@&(#$ registry for various info
 194 17:53:56 <stevenknight> 1702:  same...
 195 17:54:02 <GregoryNoel>  1702, ditto
 196 17:54:10 <stevenknight> man, there's a lot of Visual Studio cruft piling up
 197 17:54:26 <stevenknight> I'm really itching to get in there and clean this stuff up
 198 17:54:50 <stevenknight> 1703:
 199 17:54:52 <GregoryNoel>  Do you want a keyword for it?  I can set it up, but you'll have to assign them all.
 200 17:54:56 <stevenknight> not sure about my 1.x p3
 201 17:55:04 <stevenknight> keyword:  yes
 202 17:55:17 <stevenknight> "VisualStudio" seems logical
 203 17:55:30 <GregoryNoel>  do you mean 1704?
 204 17:55:39 <stevenknight> oh, yes 1704:
 205 17:56:00 <stevenknight> 1704:  seems like if it were really crucial more people would have asked for it
 206 17:56:07 <stevenknight> i only know of this one patch
 207 17:56:19 <stevenknight> on the other hand, it kind of goes along with what Russel was saying on the ML today
 208 17:56:33 <stevenknight> about how SCons really doesn't have much traction in the Java community
 209 17:56:35 <GregoryNoel>  There was something on the mailing list about JAR() recently, maybe today?
 210 17:56:46 <GregoryNoel>  oops, you already said that
 211 17:56:47 <stevenknight> yeah, Russel's threads
 212 17:57:00 <stevenknight> let's leave it p3
 213 17:57:06 <stevenknight> since there's already a patch
 214 17:57:07 <GregoryNoel>  OK
 215 17:57:25 <stevenknight> if we ever are going to do better with Java, it can't hurt to have this already supported
 216 17:57:32 <GregoryNoel>  Maybe draft a Java specialist to keep us on track
 217 17:57:50 <GregoryNoel>  Maybe Russel?
 218 17:57:58 <stevenknight> maybe
 219 17:58:09 <stevenknight> he tends to appear and reapper in fits and starts
 220 17:58:14 <stevenknight> disappear i mean
 221 17:58:47 <GregoryNoel>  I'll write him about creating a wiki page with what's needed for Java support
 222 17:58:56 <stevenknight> hmm, i thought i recalled there was someone else who showed up on the ML with some Java knowledge a month or two ago
 223 17:59:09 <stevenknight> maybe i'm making that up
 224 17:59:22 <stevenknight> well, it can't hurt to ask, anyway
 225 17:59:24 <GregoryNoel>  No, I have his name
 226 17:59:37 <GregoryNoel>  I'll ask them both
 227 17:59:43 <stevenknight> good idea re: wiki page
 228 17:59:49 <stevenknight> sounds good
 229 18:00:35 <GregoryNoel>  anyway, what did we decide about 1704?
 230 18:01:04 <GregoryNoel>  1.x, p2, you?
 231 18:01:21 <stevenknight> done
 232 18:01:58 <stevenknight> 1705:  1.x, jim ...  p3?
 233 18:02:05 <GregoryNoel>  or p2
 234 18:02:09 <jrandall>     Aye - I've got a patch in that fixes it
 235 18:02:24 <stevenknight> jrandall++
 236 18:02:32 <GregoryNoel>  bravo!
 237 18:02:47 <GregoryNoel>  p2 then?
 238 18:02:48 <jrandall>     thanks.
 239 18:02:52 <stevenknight> yeah, p2
 240 18:02:55 <GregoryNoel>  done
 241 18:03:23 <stevenknight> 1706:  1.x, but now i'm not sure of priority
 242 18:03:50 <GregoryNoel>  I'll look at it, maybe p4?
 243 18:04:02 <GregoryNoel>  It's part of getting symlinks right.
 244 18:04:16 <stevenknight> sure, 1.x, p4, you
 245 18:04:21 <GregoryNoel>  done
 246 18:04:44 <stevenknight> 1707: consensus 2.x p4
 247 18:04:53 <GregoryNoel>  done, or future?
 248 18:05:26 <stevenknight> hmm, i'm torn
 249 18:05:38 <stevenknight> part of me says future because no one seems to have asked for it
 250 18:05:47 <stevenknight> but maybe 2.x because there's already code
 251 18:06:06 <GregoryNoel>  Yeah, but infected
 252 18:07:12 <GregoryNoel>  Let's leave it at 2.x p4 and revisit later
 253 18:07:24 <stevenknight> okay
 254 18:07:31 <GregoryNoel>  1708, I'll go with Ken to look at it.
 255 18:08:00 <stevenknight> 1708:  okay
 256 18:08:15 <stevenknight> I may need to take it back if he doesn't pop up again
 257 18:08:26 <stevenknight> but we should at least see if he can take it
 258 18:08:27 <GregoryNoel>  If he doesn't like it, he can kick it elsewhere.
 259 18:08:32 <stevenknight> yeah
 260 18:08:38 <GregoryNoel>  I'll put that in the note.
 261 18:08:43 <stevenknight> okay
 262 18:09:14 <GregoryNoel>  1711, quite a mix
 263 18:09:18 <stevenknight> 1711:  yeah
 264 18:09:30 <stevenknight> when in doubt, shade to the earlier target
 265 18:09:37 <GregoryNoel>  Huh?
 266 18:09:46 <GregoryNoel>  Oh, I see.
 267 18:09:55 <stevenknight> i tend to go with the earlier/earliest milestone
 268 18:10:26 <stevenknight> i'd rather make sure it gets considered and reprioritize to later if necessary
 269 18:10:27 <GregoryNoel>  Let's make it 1.x then and give it to Gary, since he's not here
 270 18:10:48 <GregoryNoel>  p3?
 271 18:10:53 <stevenknight> ah, good idea -- he's done subst stuff
 272 18:10:54 <stevenknight> yes, p3
 273 18:10:58 <GregoryNoel>  done
 274 18:11:17 <stevenknight> 1712:  2.x, p3
 275 18:11:27 <stevenknight> perhaps Benoit if we want to assign it
 276 18:11:32 <stevenknight> he's good at things like this
 277 18:12:00 <GregoryNoel>  I'd want measurements.  I don't think scanners are that slow.
 278 18:12:19 <stevenknight> good point, they're probably not
 279 18:12:26 <jrandall>     Aye.   Not clear where the tradeoff would be as to whether it'd be worth it or not
 280 18:12:37 <jrandall>     Most of mine, it wouldn't be worth spawning
 281 18:12:46 <stevenknight> actually, (off topic) i have an optimization i'm thinking of that I'd like to discuss with you some time
 282 18:13:02 <stevenknight> let's get through bugs first though
 283 18:13:19 <GregoryNoel>  In fact, I think a small rewrite so that scanners overlap with the previous command would cure it.
 284 18:13:36 <GregoryNoel>  I do that in TaskmasterNG
 285 18:13:42 <jrandall>     nice
 286 18:13:43 <stevenknight> oh, very cool
 287 18:13:48 <stevenknight> simple and effective
 288 18:14:14 <stevenknight> 1714:  1.x, p3
 289 18:14:15 <GregoryNoel>  Is that the optimization?
 290 18:14:59 <stevenknight> no, it's basically trying to make searching CPPPATH O(1) instead of O(n)
 291 18:15:06 <GregoryNoel>  1714, agreed, but spin off JAR to another issue
 292 18:15:16 <stevenknight> 1714: agreed
 293 18:15:26 <stevenknight> 1.x, p3, garyo
 294 18:15:38 <stevenknight> could also go to Russel or whoever gets to be Java guru
 295 18:15:53 <GregoryNoel>  done; I'll note that
 296 18:16:13 <GregoryNoel>  OT: yes, they should be hashed better.
 297 18:16:16 <stevenknight> good
 298 18:16:43 <stevenknight> OT: actually, even beyond that, the search is attached to the wrong object
 299 18:16:51 <GregoryNoel>  1717, you, VS
 300 18:17:07 <GregoryNoel>  OT: yes, I've noticed that
 301 18:17:08 <stevenknight> 1717:  yes
 302 18:17:15 <GregoryNoel>  done
 303 18:17:41 <stevenknight> 1722:  it's Bill's, let's WONTFIX it...  :-)
 304 18:17:52 <GregoryNoel>  1720, has Bill left?
 305 18:18:05 <GregoryNoel>  oops, 1722
 306 18:18:10 <stevenknight> yeah he's gone
 307 18:18:19 <stevenknight> so he gets what he deserves... :-)
 308 18:18:27 <GregoryNoel>  OK, WONTFIX unless he provides a test case
 309 18:18:37 <stevenknight> done
 310 18:19:00 <stevenknight> 1723:  can this be part of the toolchain stuff you and Gary have on the backburner?
 311 18:19:10 <GregoryNoel>  yes
 312 18:19:15 <stevenknight> oh, yeah, your comment even *says* that...
 313 18:19:21 <GregoryNoel>  yup
 314 18:19:32 <stevenknight> future, you?
 315 18:19:36 <GregoryNoel>  done
 316 18:19:51 <stevenknight> 1730:  1.x, p3, Rob?
 317 18:20:33 <GregoryNoel>  Uh, maybe not Rob
 318 18:21:11 <GregoryNoel>  Oops, I was thinking of another issue; yes, Rob.
 319 18:21:19 <stevenknight> okay
 320 18:21:27 <GregoryNoel>  It's a little out of his area, but he can work with you.
 321 18:21:56 <stevenknight> okay
 322 18:22:21 <stevenknight> 1735:  research, Rob?
 323 18:22:30 <GregoryNoel>  1735, what if it's still a bug?  Where to put it?
 324 18:22:56 <stevenknight> I'm agnostic -- 1.x p3?
 325 18:23:22 <GregoryNoel>  works; I'll tell him to contact me if he needs to
 326 18:23:27 <stevenknight> done
 327 18:23:39 <stevenknight> 1716:  research, me, VisualStudio
 328 18:23:57 <GregoryNoel>  done; quit for the evening?
 329 18:24:02 <stevenknight> yeah, i have to run
 330 18:24:06 <stevenknight> real quick re: CPPPATH
 331 18:24:06 *      off-topic discussion between stevenknight and GregoryNoel
 332 18:30:36 <stevenknight> okay, really gotta run
 333 18:30:39 <stevenknight> thanks!
 334 18:30:39 <GregoryNoel>  When shall we all meet again?
 335 18:30:39 <GregoryNoel>  In thunder, lightning, or in rain?
 336 18:30:39 <GregoryNoel>  Where the place, ...  same time next week?
 337 18:30:52 <stevenknight> oh, damn, that's right
 338 18:30:57 <stevenknight> yes, default, same time and place
 339 18:31:01 <GregoryNoel>  done; cu
 340 18:31:05 <stevenknight> l8r
 341 18:31:06 *      stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
 342 18:31:07 <jrandall>     see you
 343 18:31:09 *      jrandall (n=jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca) has left #scons
 344 

BugParty/IrcLog2008-06-02 (last edited 2008-06-04 19:48:51 by ip68-7-77-81)