| 18:53:15 | * | GregNoel is no longer marked as being away |
| 18:58:55 | * | stevenknight (n=stevenkn@69.36.227.131) has joined #scons |
| 19:00:04 | GregNoel | Hi, Steven. Gary has said he would likely be late; anybody else here for the bug party? |
| 19:00:21 | stevenknight | i don't see Bill, and he's the other stalwart |
| 19:00:57 | GregNoel | And only you and I commented in the spreadsheet, and you didn't finish. |
| 19:00:59 | stevenknight | i'm just getting into the Current Issues spreadsheet -- I'm taking th late shuttle home tonight |
| 19:01:08 | stevenknight | right, just catching up |
| 19:01:17 | stevenknight | the existing comments were mine from last week |
| 19:02:03 | * | garyo-home (n=chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has joined #scons |
| 19:02:13 | GregNoel | Gary's not that late, after all |
| 19:02:24 | garyo-home | Hi Greg. |
| 19:02:44 | garyo-home | Hi, Steven. |
| 19:02:55 | GregNoel | Hey, Gary. You said you would be late. |
| 19:03:23 | garyo-home | Snuck out just in time, or mostly. |
| 19:03:43 | GregNoel | I think Steven is in a different window, updating the current issues spreadsheet; he should be back soon. |
| 19:03:36 | stevenknight | hey gary |
| 19:03:39 | garyo-home | Hi |
| 19:03:43 | stevenknight | how'd your release go last week? |
| 19:03:56 | stevenknight | GregNoel's ESP ++ |
| 19:04:12 | garyo-home | Release went great. I haven't got a lot of time for scons these days due to things at work. |
| 19:04:31 | garyo-home | We're growing the company, got new investors, new CEO... lots of new & exciting stuff |
| 19:04:39 | garyo-home | but it takes up all my time & then some. |
| 19:04:43 | GregNoel | The disadvantage of working for a living... |
| 19:04:55 | garyo-home | ...says the retired Unix guru. |
| 19:05:03 | GregNoel | {;-} |
| 19:05:03 | stevenknight | :-) |
| 19:05:27 | garyo-home | So anyway, that's all in apology for the fact that I haven't touched the spreadsheets. |
| 19:05:20 | stevenknight | well, shall we make as good use of the time as we can, then? |
| 19:05:39 | garyo-home | Yes, let's dive in. Current issues first? |
| 19:05:42 | stevenknight | i might disconnect briefly in ~10 minutes, i have to transfer shuttles |
| 19:05:45 | stevenknight | yes current issues |
| 19:05:47 | GregNoel | 2124 |
| 19:06:12 | stevenknight | 1.x p3 me |
| 19:06:20 | garyo-home | ok w/ me. |
| 19:06:23 | GregNoel | I admit a traceback is unfriendly, and something should be done about that, but the problem is that ... |
| 19:06:34 | stevenknight | parts of the VS revamp will try to clean up some general windows issues |
| 19:06:40 | GregNoel | he's really using a different name for the file. |
| 19:07:08 | GregNoel | With that said, 1.x p3 makes as much sense as anything. |
| 19:07:23 | stevenknight | okay, let's go with it |
| 19:07:27 | GregNoel | done |
| 19:07:29 | * | bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-71-131-30-2.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #scons |
| 19:07:36 | GregNoel | Hey, Bill. |
| 19:07:39 | garyo-home | 2121 has come up a few times on the list, right? |
| 19:07:41 | garyo-home | Hi Bill. |
| 19:07:51 | stevenknight | Bill! |
| 19:08:29 | GregNoel | Yes, and I think there may be dups, but I couldn't find them. |
| 19:08:41 | stevenknight | what is there about the confusing VariantDir feature that *hasn't* come up a few times on the list? |
| 19:08:46 | garyo-home | The patch seems reasonable on the face of it. |
| 19:09:05 | GregNoel | (patch?) |
| 19:09:19 | garyo-home | 212 has a patch and a test. |
| 19:09:23 | garyo-home | sorry 2121. |
| 19:10:07 | GregNoel | Ah, it looks like that came along after I commented. |
| 19:10:09 | garyo-home | Anyway, I agree w/ you guys on 1.x p2. |
| 19:10:38 | GregNoel | Yes, 1.x p2 is even stronger with a patch to work from. |
| 19:10:50 | stevenknight | yeah, 1.x p2 -- the patch looks good (haven't looked at the test case) and should be rewarded |
| 19:10:59 | garyo-home | ok, good. |
| 19:11:01 | GregNoel | done |
| 19:11:54 | garyo-home | 2122 is a way not to have to use src_builder iiuc? |
| 19:12:04 | stevenknight | right, essentially |
| 19:12:13 | stevenknight | let you add new src_builders dynamically |
| 19:12:13 | GregNoel | I don't know if this is the best API, but I agree that it something should be done. |
| 19:12:45 | stevenknight | and with some supported API so everyone doesn't have to cut-and-paste all the obj_builder stuff that's initialized in Tool/__init__.py |
| 19:12:43 | GregNoel | I published the long-promised requirements for better messages earlier today; that has a comment about this issue. |
| 19:13:10 | stevenknight | sounds good; i'll take a look when we're done |
| 19:13:12 | garyo-home | func name is maybe not perfect but yes something like this is good. |
| 19:13:50 | stevenknight | any objections to sticking with 1.x p3? |
| 19:13:50 | GregNoel | I think better messages and this are indirectly related, so fixing one will have an impact on both |
| 19:14:04 | garyo-home | But since it's an enhancement, I'd say low pri for 1.x (p3 max) or else later. |
| 19:14:27 | GregNoel | My suggestion is the same as better messages, and I don't remember what that was assigned. |
| 19:14:53 | garyo-home | 1458? |
| 19:15:08 | garyo-home | um, nope. |
| 19:15:09 | stevenknight | greg, what was the thread from earlier today re: better messages? |
| 19:15:12 | stevenknight | you have me intrigued now |
| 19:15:28 | GregNoel | wiki BetterMessages |
| 19:15:35 | stevenknight | okay |
| 19:15:36 | stevenknight | 2123: |
| 19:15:51 | stevenknight | consensus 1.x p2 ? |
| 19:15:58 | GregNoel | fine with me |
| 19:16:09 | stevenknight | who? |
| 19:16:11 | garyo-home | ok. I can probably do it. |
| 19:16:42 | garyo-home | It looks pretty easy. |
| 19:16:42 | stevenknight | okay, thanks -- just added your name to the spreadsheet |
| 19:16:45 | stevenknight | 2125: |
| 19:17:30 | GregNoel | 2122: http://scons.org/wiki/BetterErrorMessages |
| 19:17:41 | garyo-home | 2125: if Tools inherited from a base class, they wouldn't have to implement exists(). |
| 19:18:09 | stevenknight | have to switch buses, might drop momentarily |
| 19:18:46 | garyo-home | ... and if they were subclasses it'd be easy to see what's a Tool. |
| 19:18:51 | GregNoel | Tools are not classes; they're modules (i.e., imported) |
| 19:19:34 | garyo-home | Yeah (though there are other types, but classes aren't among them). I guess we can't really change that. |
| 19:20:01 | GregNoel | Not easily; there's also the backward-compatible issue. |
| 19:20:22 | garyo-home | A module can inherit stuff, but doing that just to avoid writing 'return True' seems overkill. |
| 19:20:52 | garyo-home | I think this bug is making a mountain out of a molehill; should be 2.x low pri if anything. |
| 19:21:25 | garyo-home | Greg, what you say in the ssheet is spot on. |
| 19:21:42 | GregNoel | I agree; it's overkill. That's why I suggested wontfix. |
| 19:21:52 | garyo-home | I agree, wontfix. |
| 19:22:13 | GregNoel | If Steven makes it back without dropping, we can have a consensus. |
| 19:22:38 | * | sgk_ (n=stevenkn@69.36.227.135) has joined #scons |
| 19:22:46 | garyo-home | .. and here he is now. |
| 19:22:50 | sgk_ | I'm back -- thought I was still connected but I guess not |
| 19:22:54 | GregNoel | We'll probably be changing this interface with the toolchain stuff, but I'd like to leave it until then. |
| 19:23:09 | sgk_ | still on the exists() thing? |
| 19:23:14 | GregNoel | Yes |
| 19:23:11 | garyo-home | Greg & I say "wontfix" 2125. |
| 19:23:16 | garyo-home | yes, exists(). |
| 19:23:35 | sgk_ | do new-style classes allow it to be treated like gary was suggested (re: subclassing)? |
| 19:23:45 | sgk_ | old-style classes definitely didn't |
| 19:24:04 | garyo-home | don't know |
| 19:24:06 | GregNoel | I don't think so... |
| 19:24:15 | sgk_ | okay, well not terribly important |
| 19:24:41 | GregNoel | do we have a consensus? |
| 19:24:46 | sgk_ | this was from a colleague lobbying me re: all the cut-and-paste "def exists(): return True" at the bottom of all the written modules |
| 19:24:58 | sgk_ | wontfix is fine with me |
| 19:25:10 | garyo-home | you can blame it on us. |
| 19:25:22 | GregNoel | yeah, we're hardcore |
| 19:25:34 | sgk_ | lol |
| 19:25:43 | GregNoel | 2126? |
| 19:25:44 | sgk_ | 2126 then: |
| 19:26:11 | sgk_ | no real strong feelings so far -- any reason not to leave it 1.x p4? |
| 19:26:11 | garyo-home | Having these as functions would be nice, I say 1.x p4 |
| 19:26:25 | sgk_ | done |
| 19:26:28 | sgk_ | 2127: |
| 19:26:40 | GregNoel | Moving to Python 2.2 would allow these to be written as simple names, |
| 19:26:51 | GregNoel | but that would require waiting until 2.x |
| 19:27:04 | sgk_ | ah, that should be at least noted in the issue |
| 19:27:12 | GregNoel | OK, wilco |
| 19:27:15 | sgk_ | i'll add a comment in the background here |
| 19:28:18 | sgk_ | 2127: |
| 19:28:53 | GregNoel | 2127, I'd like to spin this off onto someone who has the background with all the variations. |
| 19:29:23 | garyo-home | I do, but even with that it's not clear what the right answer is. |
| 19:29:23 | GregNoel | But who? I surely don't. |
| 19:29:32 | bdbaddog | Good evening all. |
| 19:29:52 | garyo-home | If a user says RPATH=XXX, should we try to provide those semantics by jiggling other linker args? |
| 19:29:57 | GregNoel | Hey, Bill... |
| 19:30:01 | garyo-home | Hi, Bill. |
| 19:30:29 | bdbaddog | Greetings finally back from HI, and then OC. phew. |
| 19:30:41 | GregNoel | Somehow, autoconf figures it out, since they support rpath, but ... |
| 19:30:44 | sgk_ | sounds like there's enough uncertainty that 2127 should either be a research for someone |
| 19:30:55 | GregNoel | ... the complexity looks intimidating. |
| 19:31:20 | garyo-home | I'll be happy to research it. But at some point scons has to say "this compiler doesn't support RPATH (or not well enough)" and punt. |
| 19:31:25 | GregNoel | Your research or my research? They're different. |
| 19:31:21 | sgk_ | or a 1.x-p3-and-reprioritize if "research" is too much of a backburner |
| 19:31:40 | GregNoel | Ah, your research. |
| 19:31:45 | sgk_ | yours (i.e., should be investigated) |
| 19:31:49 | garyo-home | I have a bunch of Macs with different OSes, so I can at least poke them all. |
| 19:31:49 | sgk_ | heh |
| 19:31:58 | sgk_ | okay, garyo research |
| 19:32:15 | GregNoel | My research takes priority over 1.0, i.e., research it now. |
| 19:32:24 | sgk_ | i think research should be Greg's interpretation (AIIU, investigate for reprioritization) |
| 19:32:31 | sgk_ | but in practice that doesn't seem how we're handling it |
| 19:32:38 | sgk_ | right |
| 19:32:51 | GregNoel | but if Gary wants to do it, I'll let him have it. |
| 19:33:04 | GregNoel | garyo research |
| 19:33:05 | garyo-home | (Hmm, do I have any research items? Not sure...) what I want is 1.x research (i.e. research as a priority) |
| 19:33:05 | sgk_ | okay, gary, research |
| 19:33:30 | sgk_ | that's kind of what I've morphed 1.x p3 into, mentally |
| 19:33:34 | garyo-home | but I'll get something done on it. |
| 19:33:47 | GregNoel | no, research and 1.x are both milestones; can't change the names of the priorities. |
| 19:33:51 | sgk_ | I figure we're going to have a big reprioritization of 1.x issues at some point |
| 19:33:57 | sgk_ | to break them down into manageable chunks |
| 19:34:04 | sgk_ | cause there's just too much there right now |
| 19:34:12 | GregNoel | You do have a talent for understatement {;-} |
| 19:34:44 | garyo-home | oh well, that just means there may be lots of 1.x's |
| 19:34:59 | garyo-home | (or we slip things til 2.0 of course) |
| 19:35:16 | GregNoel | Aye, there's the slip, er, rub |
| 19:35:21 | garyo-home | anyway, 2128 is next... |
| 19:35:29 | sgk_ | maybe. we need to discuss releasing 1.0 (I think 0.98.5 has baked enough) |
| 19:35:32 | GregNoel | 2128, David |
| 19:35:45 | sgk_ | and when/how to branch so there's a place for relevant dev work |
| 19:35:54 | sgk_ | 2128: david |
| 19:36:04 | garyo-home | 2128 Includes doc patch, I say 1.0 or 1.0.x. |
| 19:36:15 | GregNoel | True, but not quite yet; one issue later may need to be slipped in. |
| 19:36:23 | garyo-home | Steven: yes, it's getting to that point. |
| 19:36:48 | garyo-home | We can branch it any time and just merge things that need to go in. |
| 19:37:00 | GregNoel | You're looking at 2129; no patch for 2128 |
| 19:37:10 | sgk_ | 2128: 1.0 for the doc patch |
| 19:37:19 | sgk_ | ? i see an attachment to 2128 |
| 19:37:23 | garyo-home | me too. |
| 19:37:39 | garyo-home | a trivial two-liner. |
| 19:37:53 | sgk_ | 2129 is another david Fortran thing, though |
| 19:38:22 | garyo-home | 2129: wow, a patch which is *just* a test. |
| 19:38:27 | sgk_ | 2129: anyone, anytime (it's an added test) |
| 19:38:29 | GregNoel | Yeah, but is it the doc or the implementation? |
| 19:38:45 | garyo-home | 2128: doc. 2129: test for implementation. |
| 19:39:02 | sgk_ | no, greg's suggesting that although 2128 might "fix" the doc, |
| 19:39:12 | GregNoel | OK, 2128 1.0 David, 2129 anytime |
| 19:39:13 | sgk_ | the doc might be right (the *CPP* variables *should* be in the command line) |
| 19:39:16 | sgk_ | and the code needs fixing |
| 19:39:22 | garyo-home | aha, I see. |
| 19:39:57 | GregNoel | David either way. |
| 19:40:00 | garyo-home | We would need David to answer that. |
| 19:40:07 | * | stevenknight has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) |
| 19:40:14 | garyo-home | there goes Steven. |
| 19:40:18 | sgk_ | right, done 2128: david, 1.0, with a note about the doc-vs.-code |
| 19:40:20 | GregNoel | Ah, we just lost Steven... |
| 19:40:25 | sgk_ | hey , where'd i go? |
| 19:40:39 | GregNoel | vanished in to the AEther... |
| 19:40:46 | garyo-home | hm, my irc client said your connection timed out. |
| 19:40:41 | sgk_ | (that was the connection through the other bus timing out) |
| 19:41:04 | garyo-home | I see. |
| 19:41:17 | sgk_ | okay, 2129: anyone, anytime |
| 19:41:28 | sgk_ | 2130: |
| 19:41:50 | garyo-home | 2130, doc license issues: can we satisfy them somehow, maybe a CC license of some kind? |
| 19:42:03 | GregNoel | Have you figured out what he really wants? |
| 19:42:06 | garyo-home | That would let you still print the UG? |
| 19:42:17 | sgk_ | CC license would be the right thing, i suppose |
| 19:42:30 | sgk_ | this is probably a research, me to figure out how where to draw the line |
| 19:42:38 | GregNoel | OK, works for me |
| 19:42:44 | sgk_ | yeah, they want to make the UG available on (e.g.) Debian |
| 19:43:01 | sgk_ | but it's copyright me, not the SCons Foundation, and it's unclear if they can legallly do it |
| 19:43:03 | GregNoel | although getting it into 1.0 would be good |
| 19:43:09 | sgk_ | i'll sort it out |
| 19:43:14 | GregNoel | OK, works for me |
| 19:43:20 | garyo-home | ok |
| 19:43:28 | sgk_ | just changed it to research (Greg's research) |
| 19:43:48 | GregNoel | Ah, really? |
| 19:44:04 | sgk_ | well, i won't promise, but I do conceptually agree with it |
| 19:44:26 | garyo-home | ok, 2131 (glob needs to sort)? |
| 19:44:28 | GregNoel | I thought I understood the initial request, but not since. |
| 19:44:31 | sgk_ | in practice, right now i'm prioritizing UG updates over research to get 1.0 out |
| 19:44:59 | sgk_ | 2131: is there any downside to making Glob() return a deterministic order? |
| 19:45:02 | sgk_ | i can't think of one |
| 19:45:18 | GregNoel | glob.glob doesn't sort; why should Glob? |
| 19:45:21 | garyo-home | We should definitely sort it. |
| 19:45:31 | sgk_ | principle of least surprise |
| 19:45:34 | garyo-home | Who would want it in random order? |
| 19:45:45 | bdbaddog | and you could use --random if you did... |
| 19:45:53 | GregNoel | "least astonishment" yes, you're probably right. |
| 19:46:00 | sgk_ | having SCons rebuild things whenever it feels like it because you use Glob() seems really unehlpful |
| 19:46:23 | garyo-home | right, I think this should be 1.0.x p2. Easy and helpful. |
| 19:46:33 | bdbaddog | gotta run. hey can someone look at my comments bug 243. I did some research and seems like a real bug where we thought it was doc bug before. |
| 19:46:53 | GregNoel | later |
| 19:46:56 | sgk_ | okay, we'll try to look at 243 |
| 19:46:57 | sgk_ | later |
| 19:47:03 | garyo-home | bye |
| 19:47:14 | sgk_ | 2131: 1.0.x p2? |
| 19:47:36 | GregNoel | ok, I guess |
| 19:47:55 | garyo-home | fine w/ me. |
| 19:48:12 | GregNoel | 2132 |
| 19:48:34 | sgk_ | 2132: Ralf's fixes tend to be pretty good |
| 19:48:40 | sgk_ | i haven't lookat the code on this one yet, though |
| 19:48:44 | sgk_ | looked at |
| 19:48:45 | GregNoel | sgk_, I'm pretty sure it was an earlier issue |
| 19:48:55 | GregNoel | It uses subprocess |
| 19:49:00 | garyo-home | Can we use subprocess.Popen()? |
| 19:49:16 | sgk_ | should be able to, the compatibility layer has a subprocess module that works under 1.5.2 |
| 19:49:27 | GregNoel | we hope |
| 19:50:01 | GregNoel | If we can't find the dup, I move for 1.0.x |
| 19:50:16 | sgk_ | agreed |
| 19:50:22 | sgk_ | 1.0.x... p3? |
| 19:50:28 | garyo-home | That early? OK I guess since there's a good patch. |
| 19:50:28 | sgk_ | or p2? |
| 19:50:44 | GregNoel | yes, and if we find the dup, make it the same. |
| 19:50:48 | sgk_ | ~5 minutes until i leave the bus |
| 19:51:04 | GregNoel | and we're not even out of the current issues... |
| 19:51:09 | sgk_ | i'll volunteer to hunt for the dup |
| 19:51:12 | sgk_ | so put my name on it |
| 19:51:16 | GregNoel | ok, done |
| 19:51:24 | sgk_ | two weeks' worth |
| 19:51:37 | GregNoel | but only five new ones |
| 19:51:42 | sgk_ | true |
| 19:51:47 | garyo-home | 2133: invalid, or should we try to handle AddPostAction differently (no implicit dep on cmd)? |
| 19:51:53 | sgk_ | 2133: i think this case should work |
| 19:52:01 | sgk_ | it used to, and it doesn't seem unreasonable |
| 19:52:09 | sgk_ | ("should be made to work (again)" that is) |
| 19:52:33 | garyo-home | AddPostAction cmds don't really need to be dependencies anyway, so I agree. |
| 19:52:39 | GregNoel | sounds like a hack... |
| 19:52:49 | GregNoel | Hmmm... I think they do |
| 19:52:53 | garyo-home | No, because AddPostAction is not a builder. |
| 19:53:01 | sgk_ | agree w/gary |
| 19:53:11 | GregNoel | think of a local command that JFCLs through the binary |
| 19:53:12 | sgk_ | plus it's easier to add an explicit Depends() if you really want that dependency |
| 19:53:18 | garyo-home | Builder cmds should get auto deps, but not Pre/Post actions. |
| 19:53:20 | sgk_ | than to shut it off |
| 19:53:26 | GregNoel | the command should be rebuilt if it changes |
| 19:53:52 | sgk_ | hmm, Greg i do see your point -- SCM purity would require it |
| 19:53:53 | garyo-home | Greg: hm, I have to think about that. |
| 19:54:11 | GregNoel | we're not going to settle this now; not enough time; resume here next time? |
| 19:54:14 | sgk_ | since you can't know the AddPostAction() is irrelevant |
| 19:54:22 | sgk_ | works for me |
| 19:54:36 | GregNoel | OK, then, when next? |
| 19:54:38 | garyo-home | ok. Same time, same place, next week? |
| 19:54:45 | sgk_ | same time, etc. |
| 19:54:53 | GregNoel | 19h00? or 17h00? |
| 19:55:02 | garyo-home | 1900 is good for me, how about you? |
| 19:55:07 | sgk_ | 19h00 is fine with me |
| 19:55:13 | GregNoel | fine with me |
| 19:55:16 | garyo-home | Greg: I'll do the data entry this week from your irc log |
| 19:55:17 | sgk_ | done |
| 19:55:25 | sgk_ | gary: thanks |
| 19:55:43 | GregNoel | ok, although I have the time this week |
| 19:55:50 | sgk_ | i'll probably start a release@ thread re: really releasing 1.0 |
| 19:56:02 | garyo-home | sgk_: I was just going to suggest that. |
| 19:56:14 | GregNoel | good idea |
| 19:56:28 | garyo-home | Greg: thanks but I think I can handle it, gotta contribute somehow... |
| 19:56:49 | garyo-home | plus I'll be on vacation 23rd - 6th |
| 19:56:50 | GregNoel | Personally, I'd rather you were editing the spreadsheets... |
| 19:57:06 | sgk_ | disconnect in < 15 seconds, later |
| 19:57:08 | garyo-home | OK, I agree. I'll make some time for that too. |
| 19:57:19 | GregNoel | ok, later |
| 19:57:24 | * | sgk_ has quit ("Leaving") |
| 19:57:25 | garyo-home | bye guys. |
| 19:57:29 | GregNoel | cul |
| 19:57:35 | * | garyo-home has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0/2008052906]") |
| 19:57:37 | * | GregNoel has been marked as being away |
