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 16:35:36 *	Jason_at_Intel (~chatzilla@12.18.240.224) has joined #SCONS
   2 16:54:01 *	garyo (~garyo@209-6-36-50.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com) has joined #SCONS
   3 16:54:41 *	bdbaddog (~bdeegan@adsl-71-131-8-164.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #SCONS
   4 16:58:10 *	GregNoel is here and getting set up, another couple of minutes...
   5 16:58:26 *	sgk (~sgk@nat/google/x-vtdxqwybqnmycvwp) has joined #SCONS
   6 16:58:28 *	GregNoel is no longer marked as being away
   7 16:59:36 <garyo>	All, Jason & I've been having some toolchain discussions offline.  Hopefully I can write something up and/or Jason can implement something around it soon... based around iapat ideas mostly.
   8 17:01:23 <garyo>	OK, shall we dive into the bug list?
   9 17:01:25 <GregNoel>	Hi, everybody...  Looks like a quorum, shall we start?
  10 17:01:41 <sgk>	sure, any sign of greg yet?  (he just leaves himself logged in usually)
  11 17:01:48 <sgk>	oh, there you are
  12 17:01:49 <sgk>	!
  13 17:01:50 <garyo>	He's really here
  14 17:01:55 <sgk>	cool
  15 17:02:00 <Jason_at_Intel>	he needed a minutes to setup
  16 17:02:08 <sgk>	let's go then
  17 17:02:11 <GregNoel>	2581
  18 17:02:48 <garyo>	Seems like there's not a lot we can do about that in the near term, right?
  19 17:02:55 <GregNoel>	concur
  20 17:02:58 <sgk>	i don't think it's a quick fix
  21 17:03:03 <sgk>	so post-2.2, probably
  22 17:03:16 <Jason_at_Intel>	agreeded
  23 17:03:34 <garyo>	2.x p3 sk then? (With option to punt further if needed)
  24 17:03:39 <GregNoel>	I'm even inclined to say it's post 2.x
  25 17:03:40 <sgk>	2.x p4?  i'm pretty sure re-ordering the lines is a valid workaround, lousy though that is
  26 17:03:50 <garyo>	sgk: my thought too.
  27 17:04:15 <GregNoel>	I'll go along, even though 2.x is overfull
  28 17:04:30 <garyo>	p4 makes it puntable
  29 17:04:38 <sgk>	wouldn't surprise me if all 2.x p4 get pushed out when we re-evaluate them
  30 17:04:55 <sgk>	but it at least makes sure we take a look when it comes time to reprioritize
  31 17:04:59 <GregNoel>	ok, 2.x p4 sk
  32 17:05:05 <sgk>	done
  33 17:05:06 <garyo>	good
  34 17:05:12 <GregNoel>	2609
  35 17:05:29 <garyo>	no response yet, defer
  36 17:05:34 <sgk>	agree
  37 17:05:35 <GregNoel>	Are we still waiting for more info?
  38 17:05:42 <sgk>	i think so, yes
  39 17:05:45 <garyo>	Yes, I asked on 4/17
  40 17:05:53 <GregNoel>	ten days...
  41 17:05:55 <garyo>	maybe it's too long to wait?
  42 17:06:29 <garyo>	I'm sure there's some user error in there that maybe we could catch, but without the OP we can't do anything.
  43 17:06:30 <GregNoel>	kick him again, then close next time?
  44 17:06:30 <sgk>	if we want to be super-nice, update it with a note re: we'll close it at the next bug party
  45 17:06:39 <garyo>	agreed.
  46 17:06:41 <sgk>	yes
  47 17:06:44 <GregNoel>	done
  48 17:07:07 <GregNoel>	1610
  49 17:07:14 <GregNoel>	oops, 2610
  50 17:07:41 <GregNoel>	I don't know where this file is read, but would universal newlines help?
  51 17:07:36 <sgk>	evil cygwin
  52 17:07:40 <sgk>	evil, evil, evil cygwin
  53 17:07:49 <bdbaddog>	oh please. it's not that bad.
  54 17:07:56 <sgk>	:-)
  55 17:08:03 <garyo>	I use cygwin all the time.
  56 17:08:06 <bdbaddog>	Ditto.
  57 17:08:12 <sgk>	as a user, it's great
  58 17:08:13 <bdbaddog>	for years and years and years.
  59 17:08:14 <garyo>	It's dos that's evil in the first place.
  60 17:08:24 <bdbaddog>	many x-platform build systems with it too.
  61 17:08:30 <sgk>	trying to develop for the cross-product of non-cygwin x cygwin?  another thing altogether
  62 17:08:36 <garyo>	anyway, I have no idea where to even start on this one.  Where's that file list coming from?
  63 17:08:51 <sgk>	right, i'm not sure myself
  64 17:08:54 <garyo>	and where is scons parsing it?
  65 17:09:23 <sgk>	we usually generate those, not pick them up from a file
  66 17:09:29 <garyo>	I guess we look stupid if we ask the OP for this info.  Who wrote the swig builder?
  67 17:09:44 <sgk>	probably me, long ago enough to have forgotten the details
  68 17:09:52 <sgk>	i think we probably slap my name on it by default
  69 17:10:08 <sgk>	and there's this guy who just popped up on the ML with an itch to work on Java
  70 17:10:11 <sgk>	with Russel Winder
  71 17:10:14 <garyo>	It's probably a trivial fix once the right place is found...
  72 17:10:31 <garyo>	sgk: this one might be a good one for him to start with.
  73 17:10:36 <sgk>	sure
  74 17:10:48 <sgk>	i'll take a quick look to see if it's obvious after a little digging
  75 17:10:51 <garyo>	can you suggest it to him, with a hint or two to get him started?
  76 17:11:00 <garyo>	(or what you said of course)
  77 17:10:56 <sgk>	right
  78 17:11:21 <sgk>	and contact him+Russel re: starting in earnest on refactoring Java support
  79 17:11:51 <GregNoel>	How should the issue be handled?
  80 17:11:48 <sgk>	so... -research- sk (for now)
  81 17:11:57 <garyo>	That sounds good.
  82 17:12:00 <GregNoel>	priority?
  83 17:12:12 <garyo>	p4, only one person
  84 17:12:30 <sgk>	sounds good
  85 17:12:37 <GregNoel>	ok, done
  86 17:12:45 <GregNoel>	2572
  87 17:12:49 <garyo>	invalid I think
  88 17:12:53 <sgk>	agreed
  89 17:12:55 <GregNoel>	consensus
  90 17:12:58 <sgk>	done
  91 17:13:07 <GregNoel>	2576, consensus
  92 17:13:20 <garyo>	2582, i closed
  93 17:13:20 <GregNoel>	2587, garyo +1
  94 17:13:26 <garyo>	sorry 2587
  95 17:13:38 <GregNoel>	2588
  96 17:13:39 <sgk>	yes, garyo +1
  97 17:13:39 <Jason_at_Intel>	already closed?
  98 17:14:02 <garyo>	yes
  99 17:14:11 <garyo>	sorry, not 2588
 100 17:14:21 <sgk>	right, 2587 already closed
 101 17:14:46 <GregNoel>	2588
 102 17:14:52 <sgk>	2588:  2.x p3 +Easy ?
 103 17:15:04 <GregNoel>	Hmmm...
 104 17:15:17 <GregNoel>	Yeah, I can go with that.
 105 17:15:17 <garyo>	sgk: ok, but I want a testcase first if you're ok w/ that
 106 17:15:25 <sgk>	testcase++
 107 17:15:31 <GregNoel>	agree w/testcase
 108 17:15:49 <garyo>	so we wait for yann to give us a testcase, then it's 2.x p3 +Easy.
 109 17:15:52 <sgk>	garyo:  you mean, contact the OP for a testcase?
 110 17:15:55 <sgk>	yeah
 111 17:15:57 <garyo>	I already did
 112 17:16:06 <sgk>	garyo++ again
 113 17:16:12 <GregNoel>	++
 114 17:16:14 <garyo>	hmm, that was a long time ago now though
 115 17:16:19 <garyo>	I'll ping him again.
 116 17:16:31 <GregNoel>	Put it on your plate for now?
 117 17:16:36 <garyo>	ok
 118 17:16:39 <GregNoel>	research p2?
 119 17:16:46 <garyo>	fine w/ me
 120 17:16:49 <GregNoel>	done
 121 17:16:58 <sgk>	2589:  consensus invalid
 122 17:16:59 <GregNoel>	2589
 123 17:17:04 <GregNoel>	consensus
 124 17:17:17 <GregNoel>	2590 close garyo++
 125 17:17:31 <GregNoel>	2599
 126 17:18:09 <garyo>	Agree w/ Greg, we should do all this kind of thing in toolchain, but for now it's working as designed (though annoying)
 127 17:18:25 <garyo>	Mark as invalid, assume workaround worked.
 128 17:18:41 <GregNoel>	Steven had some thoughts about doc?
 129 17:18:55 <sgk>	yeah, if our doc example uses a string, that's misleading
 130 17:19:09 <garyo>	it does, and it is.
 131 17:19:21 <garyo>	ok, mark as doc w/ a note to fix example?
 132 17:19:25 <sgk>	++
 133 17:19:29 <GregNoel>	who?
 134 17:19:29 <garyo>	for our new tech writer? :-)
 135 17:19:31 <Jason_at_Intel>	not sure.. I always use list.. no issues
 136 17:20:06 <sgk>	I raised the doc issue, i should probably own that
 137 17:20:16 <garyo>	Jason: you can also use Append() etc., they always work.
 138 17:20:28 <garyo>	just fyi.
 139 17:20:32 <GregNoel>	then when?  and priority?
 140 17:20:43 <Jason_at_Intel>	I mean when i set a var .. i use a list not CLvar
 141 17:20:51 <garyo>	list is fine too.
 142 17:20:59 <Jason_at_Intel>	I "don't get what value it has"
 143 17:21:12 <sgk>	(heads up:  2-3 minutes until I get on the shuttle, I'll drop a minute or two until I reconnect)
 144 17:21:21 <garyo>	sgk, 2.x, doc, p3?
 145 17:21:25 <sgk>	done
 146 17:21:29 <GregNoel>	done
 147 17:21:38 <GregNoel>	2600
 148 17:21:51 <sgk>	any reasons MAXLINELENGTH isn't the workaround he wants?
 149 17:22:13 <garyo>	I doubt his LINKCOM is using TEMPFILE, which is undocumented afaict
 150 17:22:34 <sgk>	:-(
 151 17:22:39 <Jason_at_Intel>	I agree
 152 17:22:59 <sgk>	back in a bit
 153 17:23:00 *	sgk has quit (Quit: sgk)
 154 17:23:11 <garyo>	I think it's important to doc that.  I'll take it for 2.something, p3.
 155 17:23:31 <GregNoel>	2.2?
 156 17:23:38 <garyo>	sounds good.
 157 17:23:42 <GregNoel>	ok, done
 158 17:24:11 <Jason_at_Intel>	+1
 159 17:23:49 <GregNoel>	2601
 160 17:23:59 <GregNoel>	consensus
 161 17:24:12 <GregNoel>	but needs milestone, priority
 162 17:24:11 <garyo>	sgk needs to be here to decide :-)
 163 17:24:31 <garyo>	I think 2.2 p3
 164 17:24:53 <GregNoel>	Hmmm...  2.1, I think
 165 17:24:53 *	sgk (~sgk@67.218.110.220) has joined #SCONS
 166 17:25:09 <bdbaddog>	+1
 167 17:25:14 <garyo>	Hi Steven, 2601, documenting new cpp scanner: how about 2.1 p3 you?
 168 17:25:24 <sgk>	sold
 169 17:25:27 <GregNoel>	done
 170 17:25:38 <GregNoel>	2602
 171 17:26:26 <garyo>	I think we can close it; I tried to hook him into contributing because I think he cares about this stuff, maybe he'll respond.
 172 17:26:38 <sgk>	Jason_at_Intel:  how reusable do you think your subprocess work in parts is?
 173 17:27:16 <Jason_at_Intel>	hmm.. I plan to tweak it a little more.. it is bound to a reporting API i have for coloring and logging as well
 174 17:27:34 <Jason_at_Intel>	but unhooking that would not be hard
 175 17:27:12 <GregNoel>	I agree with Steven about identifying the big projects and at least listing them...
 176 17:27:41 <sgk>	GregNoel:  let's see how much time we have after the bugs
 177 17:27:55 <GregNoel>	sgk, agree
 178 17:27:51 <sgk>	we could start by just brainstorming all the big things we know we'd like to do
 179 17:27:59 <sgk>	and maybe prioritize / roadmap them next time?
 180 17:28:16 <garyo>	++
 181 17:28:31 <GregNoel>	worksforme
 182 17:27:19 <sgk>	I'm okay with closing 2602 in the meantime
 183 17:27:37 <GregNoel>	invalid it is
 184 17:28:37 <sgk>	okay, then close 2602, and add SPAWN refactoring to a roadmap discussion
 185 17:28:36 <garyo>	2604 seems like consensus
 186 17:28:59 <sgk>	2604:  rob is the man
 187 17:29:04 <GregNoel>	2604, consensus
 188 17:29:12 <sgk>	2606:  2.x p3 sk
 189 17:29:32 <GregNoel>	2606, if Steven is volunteering...
 190 17:29:45 <sgk>	yeah
 191 17:29:48 <GregNoel>	done
 192 17:30:14 <GregNoel>	2607
 193 17:30:23 <GregNoel>	consensus on toolchain
 194 17:30:28 <garyo>	yes
 195 17:30:31 <sgk>	yes
 196 17:30:36 <Jason_at_Intel>	yes
 197 17:30:50 <GregNoel>	The rest of the toolchain issues are 3.x p3
 198 17:30:58 <GregNoel>	(except one)
 199 17:31:03 <sgk>	and... that looks like it
 200 17:31:06 <sgk>	quick work tonight
 201 17:31:16 <garyo>	2608?
 202 17:31:23 <GregNoel>	er, 2608?
 203 17:31:45 <sgk>	?  is that in the spreadsheet?
 204 17:31:53 <bdbaddog>	yes. progress #'s
 205 17:32:01 <GregNoel>	You even commented on it.
 206 17:32:14 <garyo>	sgk: if you want to take a crack at it I see how it could be useful.  I'd support that effort.
 207 17:32:23 <garyo>	we sure get asked for it a lot.
 208 17:32:27 <sgk>	okay, nm, i seem to have a shortened spreadhseet here
 209 17:32:32 *	sgk refreshes...
 210 17:32:40 <garyo>	damn google... :-) :-)
 211 17:33:11 <sgk>	no kidding...
 212 17:33:16 <sgk>	stupid chrome
 213 17:33:22 <sgk>	ah, there we go
 214 17:33:35 <sgk>	hey, did you guys know there are more issue farther down the spreadsheet...?  ::-)
 215 17:33:59 <GregNoel>	No, that's the last one.
 216 17:34:07 <garyo>	222 is the last line in mine
 217 17:34:17 <bdbaddog>	ditto
 218 17:34:17 <GregNoel>	220?
 219 17:34:25 <bdbaddog>	row #
 220 17:34:30 <Jason_at_Intel>	2608 is the last?
 221 17:34:33 <garyo>	yes.
 222 17:34:34 <sgk>	looks like
 223 17:34:36 <GregNoel>	oops, yep, 222
 224 17:34:46 *	sgk slinks off and stops making bad jokes
 225 17:34:46 <Jason_at_Intel>	oh 222 row
 226 17:33:46 <GregNoel>	I like Gary's idea of a wiki page to figure out what we can do.  I'd contribute to that...
 227 17:35:18 <sgk>	GregNoel:  do we have a keyword for TNG?
 228 17:35:35 <GregNoel>	Uh, I think so; if not, it's easy to add.
 229 17:35:35 <Jason_at_Intel>	TNG?
 230 17:35:43 <sgk>	anything we do to the current infrastructure to support this is throwaway
 231 17:35:45 <garyo>	sgk: why not start by putting it on the wiki, and if people like it we add it with a descriptive name that shows it's approximate.
 232 17:35:59 <garyo>	tng=taskmaster next gen
 233 17:36:46 <Jason_at_Intel>	the next generation star trek goes across my mind everytime i see that
 234 17:36:07 <GregNoel>	ApproximatePercentage
 235 17:36:16 <garyo>	yeah, something like that
 236 17:36:27 <garyo>	but it needs to be a callback, let's not design it here.
 237 17:36:38 <GregNoel>	ApproximatePercentageThatMayGoBackward
 238 17:36:44 <garyo>	:-)
 239 17:36:36 <sgk>	I'm not following you...  put it on the wiki?  you mean a discussion about whether people want this feature?
 240 17:37:00 <garyo>	sgk: no, put the code itself on the wiki for people to try.
 241 17:37:13 <GregNoel>	No, a discussion on how we can implement it, and how approximate the options would be.
 242 17:37:17 <garyo>	well, that was my original suggestion anyway.
 243 17:37:27 <sgk>	ulp.  what i had in mind would probably be pretty invasive
 244 17:37:46 <garyo>	invasive as in changes, or invasive as in using undocumented apis?
 245 17:37:54 <Jason_at_Intel>	any more so than the buildNow tool?
 246 17:37:54 <sgk>	i wasn't thinking about the walk-the-tree-once-to-count idea
 247 17:38:01 <GregNoel>	No surprise, but invasive or not, it's not obvious what the tradeoffs are.
 248 17:38:03 <sgk>	buildNow tool?
 249 17:38:31 <sgk>	invasive as in I was thinking avoid the duplicate tree walk by counting Nodes as they're added
 250 17:38:32 <Jason_at_Intel>	I might have teh wrong name... but someone made a tool to build a target
 251 17:38:34 <Jason_at_Intel>	RIghtNow
 252 17:38:41 <Jason_at_Intel>	that was it i think
 253 17:38:56 <garyo>	never heard of it
 254 17:39:05 <sgk>	Jason_at_Intel:  send me a pointer / link?  I haven't heard of that
 255 17:39:06 <Jason_at_Intel>	so it calls the taskmaster and stuff to build a target right then
 256 17:39:20 <garyo>	Hm, there it is in the wiki. Will have to check it out.
 257 17:39:22 <GregNoel>	sgk, yeah, but a LOT of nodes do nothing: rfile duplicates, ...
 258 17:39:31 <sgk>	wow, sounds only slightly less gnarly than the SConf stuff...  :-/
 259 17:39:52 <sgk>	GregNoel:  I'm doing a lot of hand-waving, yeah
 260 17:39:58 <Jason_at_Intel>	http://www.scons.org/wiki/RightNow
 261 17:40:28 <sgk>	it just wouldn't be an easily-patchable, self-contained bit of code behind an if-test, say
 262 17:40:56 <Jason_at_Intel>	thought it would be useful to do something like this in Parts as well to speed up build times for large incremental builds
 263 17:41:14 <GregNoel>	What's wrong with "Execute()"?
 264 17:41:31 <sgk>	Execute() runs an action, no dependency checking
 265 17:41:55 <garyo>	right, and doesn't set the target as uptodate
 266 17:42:15 <Jason_at_Intel>	ideally i can read other Parts files while i start build leaf components
 267 17:42:18 <GregNoel>	Um, what runs configure checks, then?
 268 17:42:36 <sgk>	heh.  that's pretty interesting
 269 17:42:54 <sgk>	bet he's not using Configure() at all
 270 17:43:12 <sgk>	Jason_at_intel:  are you using RightNow() in Parts ?
 271 17:43:19 <Jason_at_Intel>	not yet
 272 17:43:33 <Jason_at_Intel>	I was thinking about it for the next drop
 273 17:44:06 <Jason_at_Intel>	not directly... but build it in to Parts ...
 274 17:44:18 <garyo>	RightNow code isn't very big.  A page or less.
 275 17:44:29 <sgk>	it's pretty fresh, his initial (only) checkin was 17 March
 276 17:44:52 <Jason_at_Intel>	If i allow user to call right now .... the read phase would take forever
 277 17:45:16 <garyo>	anyway, sgk, this ApproximatePercentageThatMightGoBackwards sounds like an interesting bg task if you get to it, but maybe we can design TNG to make it easier?
 278 17:45:24 <Jason_at_Intel>	However it uses the internal code.. a don't know if this would bad for TNG
 279 17:45:42 <GregNoel>	In any event, we're drifting from the topic of issue 2608, the progress indicator.
 280 17:45:44 <Jason_at_Intel>	but suggests a dev level API woudl be a nice addition with TNG for doing stuff like this
 281 17:45:44 <sgk>	garyo:  yes, that's why i was asking about TNG
 282 17:46:10 <garyo>	yup, just agreeing w/ you and trying to return to the topic at hand.
 283 17:46:22 <sgk>	yeah
 284 17:46:44 <bdbaddog>	Hey so Did u guys see my email about the tech writer?
 285 17:46:51 <Jason_at_Intel>	so progress bar is an impl for people to try to invasive?
 286 17:47:13 <garyo>	I did -- look up a few hundred lines & I mentioned them :-)
 287 17:47:36 <bdbaddog>	yup. saw that.
 288 17:47:45 <sgk>	bdbaddog:  tech writer++
 289 17:47:56 <sgk>	what would be a good next step to explore the fit w/her?
 290 17:48:01 <garyo>	Jason: too ugly for a wiki implementation, sgk may try it in the bg but no promises (did I get that right?)
 291 17:48:01 <bdbaddog>	any low haning fruit for her to take a wack at? and/or howto's she  should go through?
 292 17:48:18 <GregNoel>	Steven, could you update the issue with what you think might be possible, now and TNG?
 293 17:48:25 <sgk>	garyo:  i agree
 294 17:48:36 <Jason_at_Intel>	+1 greg
 295 17:48:37 <sgk>	GregNoel:  yes, give it to me for updating
 296 17:48:39 <garyo>	Is she up for just fixing a few of the easy doc bugs (not the ones that require detailed impl knowledge)?
 297 17:48:46 <bdbaddog>	yes.
 298 17:49:01 <garyo>	That seems like a great start.
 299 17:49:02 <GregNoel>	done, now we can go off-topic.  And think about starting a wiki page.
 300 17:49:18 <sgk>	bdbaddog:  let's you and I sync up off-line re: doc tasks
 301 17:49:22 <garyo>	wiki page for roadmap/projects?
 302 17:49:46 <bdbaddog>	sgk: sounds good.
 303 17:50:03 <GregNoel>	I was still on wiki page for progress percent, but a wiki page for big projects would be a good thing, too.
 304 17:50:56 <sgk>	re: progress percent, sounds like that's on my plate, yes?
 305 17:50:56 <garyo>	Maybe sk's comments on 2608 form the basis of the wiki page, if we're lucky
 306 17:51:09 <sgk>	that's what i was thinking
 307 17:51:13 <garyo>	+1
 308 17:51:31 <GregNoel>	And while everybody is throwing in topics, how about a 2.0 checkpoint?  I think it's ready.
 309 17:51:59 <sgk>	cool
 310 17:51:59 <garyo>	I can help w/ it this weekend, not before.
 311 17:52:11 <GregNoel>	sgk, yes progress percent is on your plate; I'll have to figure out how.
 312 17:52:15 <garyo>	(Well, I can start Fri night)
 313 17:52:43 <sgk>	fyi, i'll be out of town and probably mostly off-line this Thursday through next Tuesday
 314 17:53:19 <garyo>	No prob for the ckpoint; if it's terrible, we'll just take it down. :-)
 315 17:53:38 <garyo>	(Not that it would be of course.)
 316 17:53:44 <GregNoel>	Well, I've got one more thing I can work on until Fri, so I guess we'll start then.
 317 17:53:46 <sgk>	of course!
 318 17:54:10 <bdbaddog>	are we ready for 2.0 checkpoint build?
 319 17:54:23 <sgk>	right, that's what GregNoel and garyo are discussing
 320 17:54:25 <garyo>	That's what Greg's saying, yes.
 321 17:54:51 <garyo>	Anyone actually tried it in real life yet?
 322 17:54:55 <bdbaddog>	ugh long day..
 323 17:55:02 <garyo>	:-)
 324 17:55:24 <sgk>	not that i know of
 325 17:55:26 <bdbaddog>	I can do 1.3.1 checkpoint and 2.0 this week if you like.
 326 17:55:32 <garyo>	I'll try it on my Windows 7 box.
 327 17:55:53 <garyo>	bdbaddog: both?  I'll give you a hand of course!
 328 17:56:16 <bdbaddog>	yeah no problemo.
 329 17:56:23 <garyo>	awesome, you're on.
 330 17:56:40 <garyo>	I'll at least help w/ release announcement text etc.
 331 17:56:46 <bdbaddog>	i was starting on 1.3.1 ckpoint on sunday, ran out of steam.
 332 17:57:07 <bdbaddog>	Sure. That'd be great. We can coordinate via mail.
 333 17:57:15 <garyo>	perfect.
 334 17:57:45 <garyo>	So, project list?
 335 17:57:56 <GregNoel>	TNG
 336 17:58:03 <garyo>	subst
 337 17:58:04 <GregNoel>	Toolchain
 338 17:58:13 <garyo>	GSoC windows installer
 339 17:58:34 <GregNoel>	(is that a big project or just a merge?)
 340 17:58:35 <sgk>	Node refactor
 341 17:58:44 <garyo>	Greg: hopefully just merge
 342 17:59:05 <bdbaddog>	is the installer Wix or NSIS ?
 343 17:59:20 <garyo>	nsis if I remember correctly
 344 17:59:38 <bdbaddog>	INSTALLER: k. I have some experience with NSIS
 345 17:59:00 <GregNoel>	sgk, refactor what about Nodes?
 346 17:59:08 <Jason_at_Intel>	Nodes
 347 17:59:34 <Jason_at_Intel>	and API.. should be easier to use
 348 17:59:09 <sgk>	Node hierarchy
 349 17:59:20 <sgk>	use composition instead of inheritance
 350 17:59:24 <GregNoel>	Hmmm...  sgk, interacts with TNG.
 351 17:59:45 <GregNoel>	probably minor, though...
 352 17:59:49 <sgk>	very possibly
 353 17:59:47 <bdbaddog>	How about switching tests to py.test ?
 354 17:59:58 <sgk>	componentization model / Parts integration
 355 18:00:08 <garyo>	tests as dirs
 356 18:00:27 <GregNoel>	expose test strings
 357 18:00:41 <garyo>	greg: what's that mean?
 358 18:00:46 <sgk>	yeah, tests as dirs + expose test strings + unittest
 359 18:00:57 <sgk>	it's a side effect of tests as dirs
 360 18:01:00 <GregNoel>	Test strings go into directories.
 361 18:01:00 <garyo>	ok
 362 18:01:09 <sgk>	all the Python code that's in in-line strings get put into files
 363 18:01:11 <bdbaddog>	as files rather than strings in the test files.
 364 18:01:21 <sgk>	so the Python 3.x fixers can operate on them
 365 18:01:16 <garyo>	yah, got it.
 366 18:02:08 <garyo>	take many tools out of scons core, make them plug-ins
 367 18:01:53 <GregNoel>	That's a pretty good list.  Someone want to start a wiki page?
 368 18:02:22 <garyo>	Greg: I'll start the page based on this list.
 369 18:02:31 <GregNoel>	garyo++
 370 18:02:57 <sgk>	right, most likely coordinating w/Russel Winder re: his ideas for separate Tool development
 371 18:03:17 <sgk>	oh, use a DVCS to front the SVN repository for devlopment?
 372 18:03:26 <garyo>	sgk: definitely.  And adding system site_scons dirs, all that stuff.  And interacts w/ toolchain too.
 373 18:03:27 <GregNoel>	I'm not seeing any more brainstorming; shall we deem the list complete for now?
 374 18:03:42 <sgk>	complete enough
 375 18:03:45 <bdbaddog>	Yes!
 376 18:03:50 <garyo>	sgk: anyone can front svn with a dvcs today.
 377 18:03:57 <sgk>	send out a link, we can think and add more for two weeks
 378 18:04:06 <sgk>	and then put them in some rough priority order
 379 18:04:14 <garyo>	ok, will do.  SConsFutureProjects or something.
 380 18:04:34 <GregNoel>	garyo, call it BigProjects; we can start a separate page for Roadmap.
 381 18:04:44 <sgk>	true enough re: front-end development
 382 18:05:02 <garyo>	BigProjects it is.
 383 18:05:22 *	sgk has another 3 minutes or so
 384 18:05:26 <Jason_at_Intel>	I can use Bazaar with SCOns and Parts... but i can't use it at work ( crashes) ( same with GIT)
 385 18:05:28 <GregNoel>	SConsBigProjects would work, too.
 386 18:05:29 <sgk>	anything else to cover?
 387 18:05:43 <garyo>	No, I don't like BigProjects, that's confusable with "how to do a big project with SCons."  Anyway I'll think about it.
 388 18:05:52 <sgk>	I've found that I like Mercurial, myself
 389 18:06:18 <garyo>	I front a svn repo with git and hg daily.  hg is easy, git takes a little more work but no biggie.
 390 18:06:34 <GregNoel>	techtonik has mentioned on the mailing list that he wants to use Hg with SCons SVN.
 391 18:06:44 *	sgk needs to get more modern
 392 18:07:04 <garyo>	I prefer git because I'm hardcore, but hg is nice & pillowy :-) :-)
 393 18:07:15 <bdbaddog>	I'm fine with either hg or git.
 394 18:07:36 <Jason_at_Intel>	does hg work with non standard SVN layouts?
 395 18:07:49 <garyo>	not easily, they both suck at that
 396 18:08:03 <sgk>	okay, i'm gone -- thanks guys
 397 18:08:09 <garyo>	g'night Steven!
 398 18:08:14 *	sgk (~sgk@67.218.110.220) has left #SCONS
 399 18:08:16 <GregNoel>	Me, too; dinner is called....
 400 18:08:24 <garyo>	time for me to go too, homework time for kids
 401 18:08:26 *	GregNoel has been marked as being away
 402 18:08:34 <Jason_at_Intel>	ok later all
 403 18:08:37 <bdbaddog>	l8r
 404 18:09:01 *	garyo has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 405 18:09:14 *	Jason_at_Intel has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.5.3/20090824101458])
 406 

BugParty/IrcLog2010-04-27 (last edited 2010-04-30 14:37:24 by ip68-7-77-81)