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)