1 19:01:05 <GregNoel> Hey, it's time. We three seem to be here; anyone else for the bug party?
2 19:01:11 <garyo-home> So... is it just the 3 of us tonight?
3 19:01:52 <stevenknight> hmm, no sign yet of Brandon or Bill
4 19:03:16 <stevenknight> anyway, shall we dive in to the current issues?
5 19:03:20 <garyo-home> Yes please.
6 19:03:23 <GregNoel> I'm ready
7 19:03:40 <GregNoel> 2124, no Brandon...
8 19:03:58 <stevenknight> 2124: defer
9 19:03:58 <garyo-home> Race conditions: Steven, do they go away w/o a virus scanner?
10 19:04:08 <stevenknight> not sure, haven't had a chance to check
11 19:04:12 <garyo-home> ok.
12 19:04:21 <stevenknight> leave 2124 w/Brandon
13 19:04:34 <stevenknight> I may end up diving in to solve my own problems
14 19:04:35 <GregNoel> 2124, defer but if Brandon doesn't show up, we make it research
15 19:04:45 * bdbaddog (n=bdeegan@adsl-71-131-3-114.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net) has joined #scons
16 19:04:52 <GregNoel> Hey, Bill
17 19:04:55 <garyo-home> Hi Bill.
18 19:04:59 <stevenknight> but given how much i have going, don't want my name on it to prevent others from making progress
19 19:05:07 <GregNoel> concur
20 19:05:08 <bdbaddog> Good evening!
21 19:05:10 <stevenknight> hey bill
22 19:05:17 <garyo-home> We're just getting going.
23 19:05:22 <stevenknight> 1500:
24 19:05:35 <garyo-home> wontfix.
25 19:05:36 <GregNoel> wontfix, steven
26 19:05:38 <stevenknight> i'll WONTFIX like i said i would
27 19:05:58 <garyo-home> ok. 2161
28 19:06:00 <stevenknight> 2161
29 19:06:14 <garyo-home> I think this should be low pri.
30 19:06:20 <stevenknight> i'm agnostic, my 1.x p3 is partly real, partly just to re-evaluate it later
31 19:06:30 <stevenknight> agree re: low pri
32 19:06:40 <GregNoel> I'd push it straight to future
33 19:06:45 <garyo-home> Someone who wants it & understands it needs to drive it.
34 19:06:45 <stevenknight> bill, you object to 1.x p4?
35 19:06:53 <stevenknight> or future? i could go there
36 19:07:07 <bdbaddog> nope that's fine.
37 19:07:16 <garyo-home> ok.
38 19:07:19 <GregNoel> what pri?
39 19:07:31 <garyo-home> p4?
40 19:07:34 <GregNoel> I'd suggest p2 or p3
41 19:07:35 <stevenknight> p4
42 19:07:37 <bdbaddog> p4
43 19:07:42 <GregNoel> p4 it is.
44 19:07:54 <GregNoel> 2159
45 19:08:00 <garyo-home> 2159: greg, 1.0.1
46 19:08:17 <GregNoel> consensus
47 19:08:31 <stevenknight> done
48 19:08:33 <stevenknight> 2160:
49 19:09:02 <GregNoel> Who's an AIX guru?
50 19:09:14 <garyo-home> not me, sorry. Ask on the list?
51 19:09:23 <bdbaddog> not me.
52 19:09:27 <GregNoel> and not me
53 19:09:57 <GregNoel> Asking on the list might yield nothing; what do we do if noone shows up?
54 19:10:14 <garyo-home> ask original poster for a patch, I guess
55 19:10:22 <stevenknight> that sounds good
56 19:10:26 <GregNoel> Er, that would be me.
57 19:10:35 <stevenknight> then it sounds doubly good!
58 19:10:36 <garyo-home> oops.
59 19:10:44 <stevenknight> :-)
60 19:11:00 <garyo-home> Then I guess we guess or else do nothing.
61 19:11:08 <GregNoel> I just noticed the problem when I was looking at GetBuildPath for our last party
62 19:11:30 <GregNoel> and wondering what the implications of deprecating it would be
63 19:11:44 <stevenknight> just a guess from looking at the code, it looks like it should be an argument of '.'
64 19:12:10 <stevenknight> give it to me, i think i can figure out something semi-reasonable to do
65 19:12:22 <GregNoel> OK, low priority?
66 19:12:25 <stevenknight> most likely involving getting rid of the GetBuildPath() call in favor of Dir()
67 19:12:27 <stevenknight> yes, p4
68 19:12:43 <GregNoel> or even 2.0?
69 19:12:49 <garyo-home> OK, but without an actual AIX user it won't be much good. p4 1.x or 2.x
70 19:12:56 <stevenknight> right
71 19:12:58 <GregNoel> 2.x p2
72 19:13:03 <stevenknight> done
73 19:13:12 <stevenknight> 2162: consensus 1.0.1 p3 gregnoel
74 19:13:25 <GregNoel> done
75 19:13:31 <stevenknight> 2163: 1.0.x, p?, who?
76 19:13:38 <GregNoel> (my google connection just crashed?)
77 19:13:43 <garyo-home> mine too!
78 19:13:53 <stevenknight> ditto...
79 19:14:17 <bdbaddog> gmail and google apps for domains were out for a bit mid day today.
80 19:14:25 <stevenknight> not sure what's going on today, i heard gmail had problems that caused a stir
81 19:14:32 <GregNoel> Ah, it's back...
82 19:14:36 <stevenknight> ditto
83 19:14:39 <garyo-home> 2163: since none of us can test it it doesn't matter who puts in the patch. I can do it.
84 19:14:45 <stevenknight> garyo++
85 19:14:50 <GregNoel> done
86 19:15:05 <garyo-home> But I'm not the borland guy :-/
87 19:15:11 <garyo-home> just saying.
88 19:15:29 <garyo-home> 2164: same thing. I'll take that too.
89 19:15:37 <stevenknight> 2164: garyo, thanks
90 19:15:46 <GregNoel> good
91 19:16:12 <GregNoel> 2165
92 19:16:13 <stevenknight> 2165: leave w/me, or combine with the other race condition, or?
93 19:16:22 <garyo-home> 2165: Steven, can you merge that into the other race cond ticket?
94 19:16:26 <stevenknight> sure
95 19:16:48 <garyo-home> ok. 2166: 1.0.1 greg p2?
96 19:17:05 <stevenknight> done
97 19:17:07 <GregNoel> done
98 19:17:24 <stevenknight> 2167: i'd like 1.0.x
99 19:17:34 <stevenknight> probably 1.0.1
100 19:17:44 <stevenknight> transition to subprocess and kill our home-brew stuff asap
101 19:17:40 <GregNoel> it's not a regression
102 19:17:49 <stevenknight> *sigh* -- good point
103 19:18:00 <GregNoel> I agree that it's important, but I'd make it 1.x p2
104 19:18:05 <garyo-home> would you be ok just integrating this patch or should we do the spawn -> subprocess switch all at once?
105 19:18:05 <stevenknight> 1.1 then?
106 19:18:12 <garyo-home> yes, 1.x p2.
107 19:18:15 <garyo-home> sure 1.1.
108 19:18:18 <bdbaddog> sounds good.
109 19:18:21 <stevenknight> done
110 19:18:30 <stevenknight> i'm okay with just the patch -- incremental steps are fine
111 19:18:31 <GregNoel> I'm willing to convert to subprocess incrementally
112 19:18:37 <garyo-home> ok, good.
113 19:18:46 <GregNoel> who?
114 19:18:46 <stevenknight> 1.x p2, who?
115 19:18:49 <garyo-home> Then I'll do it.
116 19:18:52 <stevenknight> okay
117 19:18:53 <GregNoel> done
118 19:19:15 <stevenknight> 2168: anytime, p2, stevenknight
119 19:19:20 <GregNoel> done
120 19:19:31 <GregNoel> but not until 1.0 is out...
121 19:19:35 <stevenknight> right
122 19:19:31 <stevenknight> 2169: 1.0.x, p3, garyo
123 19:19:37 <garyo-home> 2169: I'll take it.
124 19:19:44 <GregNoel> done
125 19:19:57 <stevenknight> 2170: 1.0.x, p2, stevenknight
126 19:20:06 <GregNoel> done
127 19:20:21 <stevenknight> 2171: 1.0.x, p3, stevenknight
128 19:20:44 <GregNoel> ok, and depends on 2170
129 19:20:50 <stevenknight> right
130 19:20:58 <stevenknight> 2172: let bill and greg arm-wrestle for it...
131 19:21:05 <stevenknight> anytime p2
132 19:21:31 <GregNoel> I'll do it
133 19:21:38 <garyo-home> google's down again
134 19:21:54 <GregNoel> I'm still up, although I had a flash a few minutes ago
135 19:22:02 <bdbaddog> i'm still up too.
136 19:22:08 <garyo-home> ok, that's the current sheet anyway.
137 19:22:17 <GregNoel> Oops, I just went down
138 19:22:24 <garyo-home> Can I ask quickly about schedule? 1.0 is soon, then what?
139 19:22:38 <GregNoel> 1.0.1
140 19:22:52 <stevenknight> three-four weeks later, i should think
141 19:23:02 <GregNoel> two weeks to a checkpoint, then push it out a week later
142 19:23:18 <garyo-home> OK, so we start work on those tickets as soon as 1.0 is out and see how far we get.
143 19:23:38 <garyo-home> Greg: I like that schedule. I'll be out for a week in mid-Sept though for work.
144 19:23:46 <GregNoel> I figure we clear about one issue a day between us, so no more than 15-20 issues in 1.0.1
145 19:24:00 <garyo-home> Probably right.
146 19:24:31 <garyo-home> I can do more in a burst but then real life intrudes for a while.
147 19:24:46 <GregNoel> Should we talk about the Python floor while waiting for Google to return?
148 19:24:46 <stevenknight> agreed
149 19:25:10 <garyo-home> My google is back. But I think 2.3 is OK.
150 19:25:26 <stevenknight> garyo, if i can actually push out 1.0 tonight or tomorrow, do you have cycles to help w/re-branching this week?
151 19:25:30 <garyo-home> We can backport fixes to 1.0 for old python users if they scream.
152 19:25:54 <garyo-home> Steven: not really, but I'll make some. It's important.
153 19:25:54 <GregNoel> And the Olympics will conflict for the next two weeks, so fixing issues will be slower; my TiVo is recording 20 hours a day
154 19:26:08 <stevenknight> what's in 2.3 that's really crucial / helpful for internal coding?
155 19:26:15 <garyo-home> I'm olympics agnostic, so it doesn't affect me at all.
156 19:26:26 <bdbaddog> ditto (re olympics)
157 19:26:42 <GregNoel> The built-in @ stuff on functions
158 19:26:52 <stevenknight> decorators?
159 19:26:57 <GregNoel> yes
160 19:27:24 <GregNoel> It was a royal pain trying to backport tarfile to 2.2, since it uses a lot of decorators
161 19:27:35 <GregNoel> and I never did get all of the unused stuff to work
162 19:27:56 <stevenknight> i see
163 19:28:33 <stevenknight> absent data to the contrary, not sure if tarfile itself is all that compelling, though
164 19:28:34 * garyo-home is looking at release notes
165 19:29:45 <GregNoel> I was going to research it before the meeting, but when did 2.2 and 2.3 come out? I think 2.2 is 2003, so that's five years ago.
166 19:29:55 <stevenknight> sounds about right
167 19:30:16 <stevenknight> oh, no
168 19:30:25 <stevenknight> 2.2 was 21 December 2001
169 19:30:35 <stevenknight> 2.3 was 29 July 2003
170 19:30:56 <GregNoel> OS X is the system fielding the oldest Python I'm aware of, and it had 2.3 in 10.4; 10.5 has 2.5
171 19:31:22 <GregNoel> so 2.3 is what I was recalling; that's already a bit old.
172 19:32:07 <garyo-home> sets, generators, and a bunch of module changes are what I see in the relnotes.
173 19:32:07 <stevenknight> how about we poll the ML?
174 19:32:08 <bdbaddog> RH3 has 2.2.3
175 19:32:33 <GregNoel> I think 2.3 is very reasonable, particularly if we don't release 2.0 until 2009; 2.3 will already be almost six years old
176 19:32:47 <garyo-home> @bdbaddog: Really? We actually use that. But we may have upgraded the python on it.
177 19:32:59 <GregNoel> will RedHat be updated before 2009?
178 19:33:13 <stevenknight> GregNoel: doesn't matter
179 19:33:16 <garyo-home> Greg: RH3 is already ancient.
180 19:33:34 <stevenknight> the issue isn't what the cutting edge has, it's how much of the old stuff still exists in enterprise development shops and on user sites
181 19:33:51 <stevenknight> we have some time before deciding, so i'd suggest we poll the ML
182 19:34:02 <garyo-home> RH is up to 8 or 9 now. 4 is considered minimal standard by our customers (it has at least 2.3 I'm sure)
183 19:34:04 <stevenknight> and also follow-up with a reporting module in SCons that lets people send data back to us
184 19:34:06 <stevenknight> if they choose
185 19:34:09 <bdbaddog> rh4 is 2.3.4
186 19:34:34 <bdbaddog> RH5 is 2.4.3
187 19:34:53 <bdbaddog> RH4 is the mainstream in EDA now.
188 19:34:59 <bdbaddog> with some on RH5
189 19:35:24 <garyo-home> Our customers are visual effects people, RH4 is mainstream there. Little RH3 left.
190 19:35:35 <stevenknight> garyo-home: little or none?
191 19:36:08 <garyo-home> little. Still some diehards. But shouldn't use that as a guide, they're not going to run scons.
192 19:36:41 <garyo-home> Polling the ML seems like a good idea.
193 19:37:02 <stevenknight> right
194 19:37:11 <garyo-home> Can we start into the 2006h1 spreadsheet?
195 19:37:12 <stevenknight> should that be a TASK issue so it doesn't get lost?
196 19:37:12 <bdbaddog> yes. For me and all the clients I've ever had building new python,perl, whatever for use by build system hasn't ever been an issue, though sometimes it had to be staged.
197 19:37:18 <GregNoel> I'd suggest setting the warning floor to 2.3 and see if anyone makes noise
198 19:37:24 <stevenknight> i'll open it
199 19:37:30 <bdbaddog> Sounds good.
200 19:37:32 <garyo-home> stevennight: good.
201 19:37:34 <stevenknight> GregNoel: good idea
202 19:37:35 <bdbaddog> I'm off for a bit back in a while.
203 19:37:59 <GregNoel> Google is back; I have 2006H1 up
204 19:38:17 <garyo-home> me too. 1307 is the first one.
205 19:38:44 <GregNoel> only 20 issues are still live
206 19:38:53 <stevenknight> 1307: anytime, p2, Ludwig?
207 19:39:03 <garyo-home> ok w/ me
208 19:39:14 <GregNoel> done, although GSoC is almost over
209 19:39:28 * stevenknight nods
210 19:39:33 <stevenknight> 1308: FIXED
211 19:39:37 <garyo-home> Hopefully we can rope him in as a regular contributor.
212 19:40:00 <stevenknight> that'd be cool
213 19:40:03 <stevenknight> 1310: WONTFIX
214 19:40:07 <GregNoel> yes
215 19:40:12 <garyo-home> yes.
216 19:40:35 <stevenknight> 1318: WONTFIX?
217 19:40:39 <stevenknight> actually, doc the solution
218 19:40:40 <garyo-home> agreed.
219 19:40:45 <garyo-home> yes, w/ doc.
220 19:40:48 <GregNoel> done
221 19:41:09 <GregNoel> 1320
222 19:41:10 <stevenknight> 1320: WORKSFORME
223 19:41:17 <garyo-home> agreed.
224 19:41:17 <GregNoel> done
225 19:41:36 <stevenknight> 1323: anytime
226 19:41:36 <GregNoel> 1323, was just on the mailing list...
227 19:41:50 <stevenknight> oh, yeah
228 19:42:03 <GregNoel> wait a sec; let me look
229 19:42:40 <GregNoel> axel_0001@gmx.de Axel W.
230 19:42:54 <stevenknight> shall we assign it to him and see if that gets him more involved?
231 19:43:06 <garyo-home> Interesting idea.
232 19:43:18 <GregNoel> I'm for it; he must have a Tigris ID
233 19:43:20 <stevenknight> it's a future thing anyway
234 19:43:24 <garyo-home> If he drops it we're no worse off than today.
235 19:43:28 <stevenknight> right
236 19:43:29 <GregNoel> concur
237 19:43:33 <stevenknight> greg, could you follow up w/him?
238 19:43:37 <GregNoel> yes
239 19:43:47 <GregNoel> so Axel anytime?
240 19:43:50 <stevenknight> done
241 19:43:58 <garyo-home> 1328: I can do that one I think.
242 19:43:59 <stevenknight> 1328: 1.x p4 garyo
243 19:44:04 <GregNoel> done
244 19:44:19 <stevenknight> 1331: FIXED
245 19:44:36 <stevenknight> 1332: 1.x, p2, who?
246 19:44:56 <garyo-home> I think you have to do that one, Steven.
247 19:45:12 <GregNoel> I don't know the code at all, so I agree
248 19:46:06 <GregNoel> hello?
249 19:46:19 <garyo-home> silence...
250 19:46:38 <garyo-home> Maybe Steven's looking at the code?
251 19:46:47 <stevenknight> sorry, other distraction
252 19:46:55 <GregNoel> it happens
253 19:47:04 <stevenknight> agree i don't have to do 1332
254 19:47:11 <stevenknight> sorry, have to do
255 19:47:19 <GregNoel> done
256 19:47:24 <stevenknight> 1332: 1.x, p2, sk
257 19:47:46 <stevenknight> 1344: 1.x, p3, mati
258 19:47:51 <garyo-home> Mati's looking into 1334, not sure of his status on it.
259 19:47:56 <garyo-home> sorry 1344
260 19:48:09 <GregNoel> anytime, mati?
261 19:48:21 <GregNoel> it's GSoC
262 19:48:28 <garyo-home> Yes.
263 19:48:29 <stevenknight> i'm okay w/anytime
264 19:48:40 <GregNoel> 1345
265 19:48:57 <stevenknight> 1345: 2.x, p3, defer who
266 19:49:07 <garyo-home> good idea.
267 19:49:30 <GregNoel> ok, I barely remember it.
268 19:49:52 <stevenknight> 1346: anytime, mati
269 19:49:54 <garyo-home> no, I meant good idea not to pick someone now :-)
270 19:50:04 <stevenknight> :-)
271 19:50:08 <garyo-home> yes. I need to catch up w/ him since my vacation.
272 19:50:16 <GregNoel> yes
273 19:50:43 <stevenknight> 1350: 1.x, p4, stevenknight
274 19:50:50 <GregNoel> done
275 19:50:53 <garyo-home> agreed.
276 19:51:14 <stevenknight> 1351: 2.x, p4, gregnoel?
277 19:51:22 <GregNoel> done
278 19:51:23 <garyo-home> 1351: as soon as we can use tarfile()
279 19:51:28 <stevenknight> yes
280 19:51:53 <stevenknight> 1365: FIXED
281 19:52:18 <garyo-home> yes, and 1377: wontfix.
282 19:52:31 <stevenknight> 1377: consensus WONTFIX
283 19:52:39 <GregNoel> done
284 19:52:25 <bdbaddog> I'm off for the evening. Steven I'll see u at baypiggies
285 19:52:38 <stevenknight> cool, thanks bill
286 19:52:41 <garyo-home> bye Bill.
287 19:52:45 <GregNoel> later
288 19:53:08 <garyo-home> 1382, no good easy general solution.
289 19:53:13 <stevenknight> agreed
290 19:53:47 <stevenknight> do we even detect it and handle it gracefully?
291 19:53:59 <garyo-home> *Maybe* .sconsign could be chowned to real uid on linux/mac though.
292 19:54:13 <GregNoel> That would help most of the issues
293 19:54:24 <GregNoel> If you can find them.
294 19:54:21 <garyo-home> I could do that.
295 19:54:42 <stevenknight> 1382: 1.x, p3, garyo?
296 19:54:42 <GregNoel> Even better would be to remove .sconsign before writing it.
297 19:55:00 <garyo-home> Can't remove it if owned by root unless perms are loose.
298 19:55:19 <garyo-home> Anyway, could probably do a bit better than today.
299 19:55:30 <garyo-home> I'll look into it.
300 19:55:32 <GregNoel> directory perms control delete; can remove file owned by anyone
301 19:55:42 <stevenknight> if you own the dir
302 19:56:00 <GregNoel> you have to have write on the dir; you need that anyway to build
303 19:56:01 <stevenknight> or rather, if dir's perms permit it
304 19:56:23 <stevenknight> true if the .sconsign is in the same directory
305 19:56:31 <stevenknight> which of course it usually is...
306 19:56:43 <garyo-home> greg: not true that dir perms control delete, I just tried it on ubuntu.
307 19:56:59 <GregNoel> I'll bet money; check my .sig
308 19:57:13 <garyo-home> jars@jars-desktop:/tmp$ sudo touch foo
309 19:57:15 <garyo-home> [sudo] password for jars:
310 19:57:17 <garyo-home> jars@jars-desktop:/tmp$ sudo chown root.root foo
311 19:57:19 <garyo-home> jars@jars-desktop:/tmp$ sudo chmod 444 foo
312 19:57:20 <garyo-home> jars@jars-desktop:/tmp$ rm foo
313 19:57:22 <garyo-home> rm: remove write-protected regular empty file `foo'? y
314 19:57:23 <garyo-home> rm: cannot remove `foo': Operation not permitted
315 19:58:08 <GregNoel> /tmp is special; try it on another directory
316 19:58:24 <stevenknight> right, without sticky bit set
317 19:58:56 <garyo-home> wow, you're right. I bow to your l33t sk1llz.
318 19:59:18 <GregNoel> 133t?
319 19:59:27 <stevenknight> leet == elite
320 19:59:28 <garyo-home> =elite
321 19:59:59 <GregNoel> oh. thanks for the compliment. I think...
322 19:59:50 <stevenknight> h4x0r speak
323 20:00:14 <GregNoel> better translate that, too, for my simple mind
324 20:00:25 <garyo-home> hacker
325 20:00:39 <stevenknight> (garyo and I sound *so* with it for guys as long in the tooth as we actually are... :-))
326 20:00:46 <GregNoel> more likely cracker...
327 20:00:55 <garyo-home> mmm, I just read Megatokyo :-)
328 20:01:22 <GregNoel> Man, you guys are making me feel ancient!
329 20:01:16 <stevenknight> anyway, 1382: 1.x, p3, garyo?
330 20:01:25 <garyo-home> anyway, 1 or 2 more tonight? Yes, I'll take 1382.
331 20:01:42 <stevenknight> 1385: 1.x, p3, garyo
332 20:02:01 <GregNoel> I'll go for that
333 20:02:02 <garyo-home> Yeah, that one will take a bit of work but worth it.
334 20:02:07 <stevenknight> 1388: uhh... not sure
335 20:02:13 <stevenknight> not me not me not me
336 20:02:17 <stevenknight> please please please
337 20:02:24 <stevenknight> make the unicode stop hurting
338 20:02:26 <garyo-home> Maybe more recent python will help?
339 20:02:34 <GregNoel> not to my knowledge.
340 20:02:46 <stevenknight> help a little, but someone on the ML explained that this is a really really thorny problem
341 20:02:53 <GregNoel> stevenknight, do you know the sound a weasel makes as it dies?
342 20:03:00 <stevenknight> pop?
343 20:03:15 <GregNoel> (squeeky voice) not me not me not me
344 20:04:06 <GregNoel> I guess you have to be there
345 20:04:15 <stevenknight> ah, got it -- took a little while
346 20:04:36 <stevenknight> 1388: 1.x p3 to reevaluate
347 20:04:46 <garyo-home> ok w/ me.
348 20:04:49 <GregNoel> anyway, i18n is a huge job
349 20:04:57 <stevenknight> right
350 20:04:59 <GregNoel> maybe even later than that
351 20:05:06 <stevenknight> i keep hoping some hero will show up...
352 20:05:13 <GregNoel> somebody needs to research it, a hero
353 20:05:23 <GregNoel> ah, that's what you said!
354 20:05:23 <stevenknight> 1388: 1.x, p3, hero
355 20:05:33 <garyo-home> don't look in my direction
356 20:05:38 <GregNoel> ok, I'll figure something out
357 20:05:43 <stevenknight> hey, i kind of like the idea of a nameless "hero" that we can assign things to...
358 20:05:57 <GregNoel> except that they wouldn't get done...
359 20:06:10 <stevenknight> oh, details... :-)
360 20:06:18 <garyo-home> ok guys, I'm getting punchy. Time for me to go to bed.
361 20:06:25 <stevenknight> sounds good
362 20:06:25 <GregNoel> let's defer it until next time and see if we can kill the rest
363 20:06:30 <stevenknight> agreed
364 20:06:33 <stevenknight> same time next week?
365 20:06:42 <garyo-home> OK, same time next week is ok for me.
366 20:06:50 <GregNoel> ok
367 20:07:05 <stevenknight> all right -- good night, all
368 20:07:07 <GregNoel> pick up here with i18n?
369 20:07:10 <stevenknight> yes
370 20:07:16 <GregNoel> cu then
371 20:07:16 <garyo-home> l8r :-)
372 20:07:17 <stevenknight> and I'll go close #1500
373 20:07:23 <stevenknight> :-) good one
374 20:07:24 <GregNoel> thanks
375 20:07:35 * stevenknight has quit ("Leaving")
376 20:07:58 <GregNoel> 'nite Gary; I'm off for more Olympics
377 20:08:07 <garyo-home> have fun!
378 20:08:14 <GregNoel> I'll do that
379 20:08:08 * GregNoel has been marked as being away
380 20:08:18 * garyo-home has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0.1/2008070208]")
381
