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 16:08:25 *	Jason_at_Intel (~chatzilla@12.18.240.224) has joined #SCONS
   2 16:49:47 *	techtonik (~chatzilla@mm-127-247-57-86.leased.line.mgts.by) has joined #SCONS
   3 16:51:42 *	bdbaddog (~bdeegan@adsl-71-131-4-229.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #SCONS
   4 16:59:43 *	GregNoel is no longer marked as being away
   5 16:59:32 *	GregNoel has entered the building...
   6 17:00:51 <bdbaddog>	Good evening Greg!
   7 17:02:04 <GregNoel>	Hey, all; I don't see Steven, although he said he would make it.  Shall we give him a couple of minutes?
   8 17:02:14 <bdbaddog>	Sure.
   9 17:04:39 *	sgk (~sgk@nat/google/x-fhtfswcishgntsxo) has joined #SCONS
  10 17:04:47 <sgk>	yo
  11 17:04:56 <GregNoel>	And here he is; shall we get started?
  12 17:05:16 <bdbaddog>	+1
  13 17:05:19 <sgk>	let's do it
  14 17:05:27 <GregNoel>	2545 consensus anytime p4 Greg
  15 17:05:27 <GregNoel>	2627 consensus 2.1 p2 Steven
  16 17:05:27 <GregNoel>	2628 needs a priority, but otherwise consensus research Steven; how about p3?
  17 17:05:38 <sgk>	p3 sounds good
  18 17:05:58 <bdbaddog>	+1
  19 17:06:05 <Jason_at_Intel>	+1
  20 17:06:04 <GregNoel>	done
  21 17:06:18 <GregNoel>	2630 needs a priority, but otherwise consensus research Steven; how about p2?
  22 17:06:28 <sgk>	how about 2629?
  23 17:06:58 <GregNoel>	oops, yes 2629; getting ahead of myself
  24 17:06:48 <sgk>	since i took the 2628 (and likely 2630), how about 2629 => garyo?
  25 17:07:26 <sgk>	seems like he already looked at it, and he can kick it back if it's a problem
  26 17:07:25 <GregNoel>	works for me; what priority?
  27 17:07:48 <sgk>	since it's related to batching, p2
  28 17:08:42 <sgk>	maybe with a note inviting kicking it to me if it looks too tied to the other batching things
  29 17:08:36 <GregNoel>	no other opinion, done
  30 17:08:43 <sgk>	done
  31 17:08:46 <GregNoel>	try 26eo?
  32 17:08:54 <GregNoel>	2630?
  33 17:08:55 <sgk>	26eo:  p2
  34 17:09:04 <sgk>	:-)
  35 17:09:18 <bdbaddog>	+1
  36 17:09:23 <GregNoel>	done
  37 17:09:35 <GregNoel>	2631 consensus 2.1 p3 Rob
  38 17:09:35 <GregNoel>	2632 consensus 2.1 p3 Rob
  39 17:09:35 <GregNoel>	2633
  40 17:10:03 <sgk>	any barriers to inviting anatoly to update directly?
  41 17:10:18 *	sgk looks again at the bug itself...
  42 17:10:45 <GregNoel>	I'd like him to pass his changes by a native speaker before he commits, but otherwise no problem for me.
  43 17:10:55 <sgk>	agreed re: editing
  44 17:10:57 <GregNoel>	I'll volunteer to be his editor.
  45 17:11:01 <sgk>	that could be either you or me
  46 17:11:04 <sgk>	you
  47 17:11:06 <sgk>	thnx
  48 17:11:10 <GregNoel>	or you...
  49 17:11:16 <sgk>	no backs!
  50 17:11:25 <GregNoel>	or even both, depending on who's available.
  51 17:11:37 <sgk>	both sounds reasonable
  52 17:12:04 <GregNoel>	OK, I'll make him a committer and close the issue... hmmm, what status?
  53 17:12:36 <sgk>	depending on his cycles... 2.0 would be nice...  p2?
  54 17:12:38 <sgk>	maybe even p1?
  55 17:12:47 <sgk>	there's a window of opportunity with 2.0 going out the door
  56 17:13:09 <GregNoel>	OK, I'll assign him the issue.
  57 17:13:27 <GregNoel>	2.0 p1 tech<esc>
  58 17:13:40 <sgk>	done
  59 17:14:02 <GregNoel>	2634
  60 17:14:20 <sgk>	garyo, ask for confirmation, close in two weeks if none?
  61 17:14:37 <Jason_at_Intel>	agreed
  62 17:15:15 <bdbaddog>	+1
  63 17:15:16 <GregNoel>	I can ask when I post the issues, but I'll assign it to Gary so he'll stay in the loop.
  64 17:15:55 <sgk>	okay
  65 17:15:22 <GregNoel>	done
  66 17:15:37 <GregNoel>	2635
  67 17:16:10 <sgk>	does david cournapeau have any cycles for 2635?
  68 17:16:27 <sgk>	assign to him, ask for it back if he's still mired in finishing his thesis?
  69 17:16:30 <GregNoel>	Unfortunately, I have to admit my first language was FORTRAN, but David would be a better choice.
  70 17:17:17 <sgk>	let's give him a crack at it then
  71 17:17:27 <GregNoel>	OK, I'll do that, but if he can't, I'll take it (but not at a high priority).  (I think he won't be done until late June.)
  72 17:17:37 <sgk>	agreed
  73 17:17:37 <sgk>	thnx
  74 17:17:40 <GregNoel>	done
  75 17:18:06 <GregNoel>	2636
  76 17:18:00 <sgk>	2636:  i'm very much out of the loop on the packaging stuff, will go with consensus
  77 17:18:21 <GregNoel>	What happened to the student who wrote it?
  78 17:18:30 <sgk>	no idea
  79 17:18:33 <sgk>	was garyo mentor?
  80 17:19:00 <GregNoel>	Hmmm...  Not me, so probably him.
  81 17:19:16 <sgk>	assign to garyo to follow up with student?
  82 17:19:24 <GregNoel>	good idea
  83 17:19:54 <GregNoel>	what milestone, priority?
  84 17:20:02 <sgk>	2.1 p3 ?
  85 17:20:59 <bdbaddog>	+1
  86 17:21:13 <Jason_at_Intel>	+1
  87 17:21:13 <GregNoel>	I guess that's OK; he can ask for it to be changed if need be.  2.2 might be better.
  88 17:21:26 <sgk>	done
  89 17:21:24 <GregNoel>	done
  90 17:21:34 <GregNoel>	1.3.doc I'd like to declare 2.0.0.beta.20100531 the release candidate and reopen the trunk for 2.1 development.  Since we have no documented flow for cherry-picking changesets from the trunk, I'm reluctant to say that these documentation issues could go in 2.0.
  91 17:21:34 <GregNoel>	I have a background project to SConsify the current build scheme, so I've been working through the release flow in detail.  It's a mess, but I think I know what the flow should be; I could write up how to do the cherry-picking.
  92 17:21:34 <GregNoel>	But no matter what, I think Steven should make the assignments and then get hard-nosed about nagging to see that it gets done.  Otherwise it won't get done in time for 3.0...
  93 17:22:09 <sgk>	"...see that it gets done..."  it == ?
  94 17:22:16 <sgk>	the doc issues ?
  95 17:22:23 <GregNoel>	yes
  96 17:22:54 <sgk>	(break for shuttle in a few minutes)
  97 17:23:07 <GregNoel>	The antecedent is "assignments" so it should be "them."  Mea culpa.
  98 17:23:43 <sgk>	i can do some assigning, but not sure who's in the volunteer pool
  99 17:24:04 <sgk>	(shuttle coming, biab)
 100 17:24:06 *	sgk has quit (Quit: sgk)
 101 17:27:36 <GregNoel>	techtonik, are you here?
 102 17:28:00 *	sgk (~sgk@67.218.102.129) has joined #SCONS
 103 17:28:13 <sgk>	back (i think)
 104 17:28:14 <GregNoel>	Maybe it would be a good test for techtonik (if you're reading, would you be willing to try?); it's clearly documentation that needs to be done.
 105 17:28:49 <sgk>	what'd i miss?
 106 17:29:06 <bdbaddog>	nada
 107 17:29:12 <GregNoel>	dead silence...
 108 17:29:19 <sgk>	heh
 109 17:29:30 <bdbaddog>	long day IRL
 110 17:30:33 <sgk>	okay, how about i just take a stab at reassigning the doc issues then
 111 17:30:36 <sgk>	might be random to start
 112 17:30:39 <bdbaddog>	so should we change the bootstrap logic to have a beta level ?
 113 17:30:42 <sgk>	but people can balk and then i can correct
 114 17:30:54 <bdbaddog>	and/or RC ?
 115 17:31:12 <sgk>	bdbaddog:  not sure what you mean
 116 17:31:16 <bdbaddog>	so bootstrap.py CHECKPOINT=beta|RC
 117 17:31:22 <bdbaddog>	in addition to d,r
 118 17:31:31 <sgk>	i already changed ".alpha." => to ".beta." in the SConstruct file
 119 17:31:38 <sgk>	for this last checkpoint
 120 17:31:50 <sgk>	but i just did it by hand, no configurability
 121 17:31:40 <bdbaddog>	k
 122 17:31:57 <GregNoel>	No, I'm about to check in something that will fix that, but I'm still testing it.
 123 17:32:09 <sgk>	cool
 124 17:32:30 <sgk>	are all of the 1.3.x fixes in the current .beta.20100531 checkpoint?
 125 17:32:36 <bdbaddog>	nope.
 126 17:32:45 <bdbaddog>	I need to merge the MSVC stuff over.
 127 17:33:16 <bdbaddog>	should I do by hand, or would svnmerge be useful for this? though it would be a cherry pick of course.
 128 17:33:50 <sgk>	svnmerge can cherry pick
 129 17:33:56 <sgk>	just specify the revisions with -r
 130 17:34:16 <GregNoel>	I've got a partially-complete wiki page on how to cherry-pick; I can finish it and post it.
 131 17:34:43 <bdbaddog>	k. that'd be great
 132 17:34:48 <GregNoel>	Yes, it uses svnmerge
 133 17:35:15 <sgk>	very cool
 134 17:35:19 <GregNoel>	Give me a day or two to finish it and try it out.
 135 17:35:31 <bdbaddog>	hmm. o.k .was going to give it a wack tonight.
 136 17:35:44 <sgk>	bdbaddog:  are the 1.3.x changes in the latest checkpoint?  that is, they've gotten air time?
 137 17:36:01 <bdbaddog>	lateste 1.3 checkpoint yes.
 138 17:36:14 <bdbaddog>	though there's one bug or email about some initialization issues on vista.
 139 17:36:41 <sgk>	right, that's the one garyo replied to earlier today, yes?
 140 17:36:48 <bdbaddog>	yes
 141 17:37:50 <sgk>	if we take these in 2.0, do we need another checkpoint for them, or do we go with it?
 142 17:38:16 <GregNoel>	I'd rather not have another checkpoint.
 143 17:38:47 <GregNoel>	In fact, I'd rather go with the current checkpoint.
 144 17:39:05 <sgk>	i'm really loathe to ship something that regresses from 1.3.x
 145 17:39:23 <sgk>	especially in an area like the Windows initialization
 146 17:39:11 <bdbaddog>	ditto
 147 17:40:10 <GregNoel>	I am, too, but I've promised that 2.0.0 would be out on Flag Day; unless we put out another checkpoint this weekend, there's no way.
 148 17:39:38 <bdbaddog>	I can do the merge, and push out another checkpoint tonight/tomorrow?
 149 17:39:44 <Jason_at_Intel>	There seems to be a lot of issues with msvc.. I don't think people want this to get worse
 150 17:40:12 <Jason_at_Intel>	2.0 should make it better or be the same as 1.3
 151 17:41:07 <sgk>	bdbaddog:  i like your idea
 152 17:41:25 <sgk>	garyo is (i think) on vacation this week, any chance someone else can look at the outstanding vista issue?
 153 17:41:46 <bdbaddog>	sure. I can respond with the guy.
 154 17:42:50 <sgk>	thnx
 155 17:43:08 <GregNoel>	sgk, can you assign the doc issues and see how many can be done this week?  See if some can get in the checkpoint?  Maybe delay a checkpoint until Friday or so?
 156 17:43:11 <sgk>	i'll try to be online tonight, so if there's anything i can help with, le tme know
 157 17:43:18 <bdbaddog>	will do.
 158 17:43:42 <bdbaddog>	GregNoel - can u point me to your cherry picking page? is it useful though incomplete at this point?
 159 17:44:16 <GregNoel>	It's on my home wiki...
 160 17:45:03 <GregNoel>	I need a day to clean it up, at least; too many notes to self to be useful
 161 17:45:11 <bdbaddog>	http://scons.org/wiki/GregNoel
 162 17:45:14 <bdbaddog>	there?
 163 17:45:52 <GregNoel>	http://localhost:8000/
 164 17:46:38 <bdbaddog>	ahh. yeah.. that's hard to get to from here.. ;)
 165 17:47:04 <GregNoel>	Only three firewalls to get through...
 166 17:47:24 <bdbaddog>	oh.. I thought you'd make it a real challenge.. ;)
 167 17:47:43 <bdbaddog>	Any other items for today?
 168 17:48:18 <GregNoel>	sgk, will you reassign the doc issues?
 169 17:48:31 <sgk>	yes
 170 17:48:48 <GregNoel>	Can you do it tonight?
 171 17:49:33 <sgk>	i think so
 172 17:49:41 <sgk>	tomorrow morning otherwise
 173 17:49:52 <GregNoel>	If we get them to people tonight, we might get some back for the next checkpoint.
 174 17:50:52 <sgk>	okay, if we finish here soon i may have time right now
 175 17:51:47 <GregNoel>	I don't think we have anything else...  And my TiVo is sick; I need to go troubleshoot it.
 176 17:52:03 <bdbaddog>	k. sounds good to me.
 177 17:52:04 <sgk>	anyone have anything else to discuss?
 178 17:52:17 <Jason_at_Intel>	not here at the moment
 179 17:52:26 <bdbaddog>	nope.
 180 17:52:35 <sgk>	all right then, I'll peel off and go scatter some documentation issues to the wind
 181 17:52:36 <GregNoel>	Looks like we're done, so g'night all...
 182 17:52:51 <Jason_at_Intel>	bye
 183 17:52:54 <bdbaddog>	gnight as well
 184 17:53:00 *	GregNoel has left the building...
 185 17:53:02 <sgk>	bye
 186 17:53:03 *	Jason_at_Intel has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.5.3/20090824101458])
 187 17:53:06 *	sgk (~sgk@67.218.102.129) has left #SCONS
 188 17:53:14 *	bdbaddog (~bdeegan@adsl-71-131-4-229.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has left #SCONS
 189 17:54:18 *	GregNoel has been marked as being away
 190 

BugParty/IrcLog2010-06-01 (last edited 2010-06-06 01:45:36 by ip68-7-77-81)