1 17:29:34 * sgk_ (n=stevenkn@67.218.110.27) has joined #scons
2 17:31:20 <sgk_> hey greg
3 17:31:39 <Greg_Noel> Hi, Steven.
4 17:32:55 <sgk_> wiki down in general, or is it just me?
5 17:33:20 <Greg_Noel> Not just you.
6 17:33:21 <Hydrant> I noticed that too
7 17:33:45 <sgk_> damn, i've grown dependent on the links in the BugParty page
8 17:34:19 <Greg_Noel> I can post some...
9 17:34:27 <sgk_> thanks, that'd help
10 17:34:37 <sgk_> i've had no chance to pre-review, unfortunately... :-(
11 17:35:17 <sgk_> is there anything i can/should look at over at pair.com w.r.t. trying to resurrect the wiki?
12 17:35:34 <sgk_> (says the complete novice...)
13 17:35:51 <Greg_Noel> Dunno. I was wondering if Gary did something.
14 17:36:07 <Greg_Noel> (The spreadsheet is http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=p1VsJ6ACdIhAs91YGwSnBYw&hl=en)
15 17:37:02 <Greg_Noel> Sohail, you here for the bug party?
16 17:37:33 <sgk_> Greg_Noel: thanks, starting in
17 17:40:24 <sgk_> 1910: me, research
18 17:40:27 <sgk_> figure out if it's a real bug
19 17:40:31 <Greg_Noel> concur
20 17:40:48 <sgk_> (yeah, I know, we don't quite have a quorum, but what the hey...)
21 17:41:00 <sohail> Greg_Noel, no, just hanging out sorry
22 17:41:14 <Greg_Noel> (Maybe Gary will show up eventually)
23 17:41:39 <Greg_Noel> sohail, if you have an opinion, don't hesitate to speak up.
24 17:42:21 <sohail> Greg_Noel, will do
25 17:43:31 <sgk_> 2249: weird weird weird
26 17:43:36 <sgk_> needs some research
27 17:43:47 <Greg_Noel> yeah, for sure
28 17:43:47 <sgk_> smells like a possible drive letter issue to me
29 17:43:47 <Greg_Noel> I hadn't thought of drive letters.
30 17:44:41 <sgk_> put my name on 2249 too
31 17:44:52 <sgk_> i'm actually buried in other Windows stuff now anyway
32 17:44:55 <Greg_Noel> ok, done. I'm glad it's not me!
33 17:45:40 <sgk_> :-)
34 17:46:05 * sgk_ curses the network lag on the shuttle...
35 17:48:10 <sgk_> 2084: looks to me like a future thing (2.x or later) and not terribly high priority
36 17:48:18 <sgk_> David has a workaround for his situation
37 17:48:25 <sgk_> and no one else has been beating down the doors for it
38 17:48:55 <Greg_Noel> Priority?
39 17:49:54 <sgk_> p4 works for me
40 17:49:57 <Greg_Noel> 2084, future, draft pick, p4, done
41 17:50:36 <sgk_> 2190: would this be easy to drop into the current framework?
42 17:51:35 <Greg_Noel> No worse than many others. Is the short-term tradeoff worth the time we could spend on a replacement?
43 17:51:54 <Greg_Noel> And there are workarounds.
44 17:51:55 <sgk_> yeah, probably not
45 17:52:13 <sgk_> future, mark it with some keyword for Configure replacement
46 17:52:21 <Greg_Noel> works for me
47 17:52:29 <sgk_> i.e., agree w/Greg :-)
48 17:52:55 <Greg_Noel> Any ideas for a keyword?
49 17:53:10 <sgk_> configure ?
50 17:53:49 <Greg_Noel> I'd rather not; too vague; could be something for existing configure.
51 17:53:59 <sgk_> good point
52 17:54:18 <Greg_Noel> Oh, and a priority is needed
53 17:54:34 <sgk_> p4 since there are workarounds
54 17:54:38 <sgk_> or p3
55 17:54:08 <sgk_> configure_revamp ?
56 17:55:00 <Greg_Noel> Longish. I'd go for something like ConfigNG first.
57 17:55:34 <Greg_Noel> p3 works for me for now. I'd like to see it sooner, but there's so much to do.
58 17:55:57 <sgk_> right
59 17:56:38 <sgk_> 2190: future, p3, +configure_revamp Keyword
60 17:56:46 <Greg_Noel> done
61 17:57:08 <sgk_> 2196: agree with both Russel and you in principle
62 17:57:16 <sgk_> but it's a big architectural change
63 17:57:30 <Greg_Noel> Yeah, that's why I think future.
64 17:57:37 <sgk_> agree w/future
65 17:58:12 <Greg_Noel> On the other hand, there are some features in Python 2.2 that may help, so I could be convinced otherwise.
66 17:58:00 <sgk_> I'm working in the background on a list of big architectural changes to tackle in 2009
67 17:58:12 <sgk_> e.g. DAG with real edge objects
68 17:58:27 <Greg_Noel> Hmm...
69 17:58:57 <Greg_Noel> Why would you need the arcs articulated?
70 17:59:01 <sgk_> i still say future, with the intent of discussing it at a prioritization session for big architecture work
71 17:59:14 <Greg_Noel> so, needs a keyword
72 17:59:22 <sgk_> right
73 17:59:37 <sgk_> "architecture" or "arch_revamp" ?
74 17:59:48 <Greg_Noel> rearchitecture?
75 17:59:53 <sgk_> +1
76 18:00:15 <Greg_Noel> so future, p2, done
77 18:00:20 <sgk_> done
78 18:00:23 <sgk_> re: DAG edges
79 18:00:41 <sgk_> one, i've finally caught up with your good advice about being able to do independent topo sorts and the like
80 18:00:56 <sgk_> more immediate and practically, i'd like to be able to walk the DAG in the other direction
81 18:01:04 <sgk_> i think that would help developer builds
82 18:01:30 <sgk_> because you could say "I know foo.c is the only thing that changed, build just its targets"
83 18:01:37 <Greg_Noel> It's possible to build the transverse graph as you go, but it's slower.
84 18:01:57 <sgk_> but you'd have to walk it to do so, yes?
85 18:02:27 <sgk_> maybe i'm naively assuming that separating the edges
86 18:02:46 <sgk_> would provide benefit from being able to use more sophisticated algorithms
87 18:03:12 <sgk_> than our current tweaked-into-behaving-kinda-how-we-want walk
88 18:04:31 <Greg_Noel> I can agree with that, but building the transverse graph is cheap relative to what else you have to do. It's probably not a lot different than building it as you go.
89 18:05:47 <Greg_Noel> And you still have to be able to create arcs for implicit dependencies, so the targets of foo.h may not be known until you walk up.
90 18:04:40 <sgk_> okay
91 18:04:52 <sgk_> gary just fixed the wiki -- deprecation warnings
92 18:05:00 <sgk_> sent email that he won't be able to make it
93 18:05:40 <sgk_> onward?
94 18:05:54 <Greg_Noel> yeah
95 18:07:06 <sgk_> 2261: 2.x p3
96 18:07:50 <Greg_Noel> BTW, disclaimer for this evening: We've had almost four inches of rain in the last couple of days, and the local power grid seems to be unstable. We've had three power trips today, all short enough so that the only thing that rebooted was our firewall, but if I suddenly stop, figure that I've lost power.
97 18:08:14 <sgk_> Greg_Noel: okay, thanks for the heads up
98 18:08:19 <sgk_> good luck...
99 18:07:59 <sgk_> mpcomplete is a googler whose initials are "MP"
100 18:09:33 <Greg_Noel> Tell him he needs to change his name: MP-complete has been demonstrated to be NP-hard.
101 18:09:51 <sgk_> :-)
102 18:10:23 <sgk_> 2268: 2.x p3 draft pick
103 18:10:31 <Greg_Noel> 2261, okay.
104 18:11:20 <Greg_Noel> 2268, ok, may need to revisit.
105 18:11:57 <Greg_Noel> Agree that stack trace is not a good thing.
106 18:12:39 <sgk_> 2269: agree, wontfix
107 18:12:44 <Greg_Noel> done
108 18:12:56 <sgk_> probably should document the API if we expect him to reach into the Executor, though
109 18:13:45 <Greg_Noel> str(Executor) probably gets him what he wants; I'd rather not tie down the API
110 18:14:31 <sgk_> Greg_Noel: good
111 18:14:35 <sgk_> i like it
112 18:14:56 <sgk_> 2270: me, 2.x, VisualStudio keyword
113 18:15:01 <sgk_> actually, 1.3
114 18:15:08 <sgk_> i'm integrating vs_revamp
115 18:15:34 <sgk_> i don't think this part is affected by that, but i'll double check and do the right thing
116 18:15:49 <Greg_Noel> ok, more issues for you to resolve.
117 18:15:55 <sgk_> (or maybe vs_revamp keyword...? whatever's appropriate)
118 18:16:50 <Greg_Noel> Probably vs_revamp, but I don't know the distinction.
119 18:17:13 <sgk_> either way
120 18:17:10 <Greg_Noel> Priority?
121 18:17:15 <sgk_> p3
122 18:17:23 <Greg_Noel> done
123 18:17:56 <sgk_> 2270: me, 1.3, p3
124 18:18:04 <sgk_> part of integrating again
125 18:18:15 <sgk_> sorry
126 18:18:19 <Greg_Noel> good; not me
127 18:18:20 <sgk_> 2271: me, 1.3, p3
128 18:18:31 <Greg_Noel> right
129 18:20:03 <sgk_> 2272: ouch
130 18:20:18 <Greg_Noel> you got that right.
131 18:20:29 <sgk_> good analysis
132 18:20:42 <Greg_Noel> yeah, we should recruit him
133 18:20:55 <sgk_> good idea
134 18:21:21 <sgk_> 2.x p3 draft choice
135 18:21:28 <sgk_> and see if we can sign him up as the draft choice?
136 18:22:04 <Greg_Noel> ok, with some reference to TaskmasterNG, that may complicate this even further.
137 18:22:15 <sgk_> right
138 18:23:00 <sgk_> 2273:
139 18:23:20 <sgk_> anytime, anyone
140 18:23:42 <Greg_Noel> anytime only works if there's someone assigned
141 18:23:56 <sgk_> good point
142 18:24:06 <Greg_Noel> I think we should put out a RFE
143 18:24:15 <sgk_> E == editor?
144 18:24:16 <Greg_Noel> Request For Editor
145 18:24:16 <sgk_> concur
146 18:24:46 <sgk_> 2273: anytime, Greg_Noel?
147 18:25:08 <Greg_Noel> It's DOS, so I'd probably botch it.
148 18:25:15 <sgk_> okay
149 18:25:20 <sgk_> 2273: anytime, stevenknight
150 18:25:47 <Greg_Noel> maybe we should give it to Gary as punishment for not being here. {;-}
151 18:25:55 <sgk_> i LIKE it... :-)
152 18:26:17 <Greg_Noel> done
153 18:26:15 <sgk_> ~5 minutes to bus stop
154 18:26:40 <Greg_Noel> Too bad; I had some other things I wanted to discuss.
155 18:26:41 <sgk_> 2274: 1.x p3, see if arve comes up with the patch he mentions
156 18:27:16 <Greg_Noel> Maybe we should see if Gary&others could handle a special meeting?
157 18:28:05 <Greg_Noel> 2274, ok
158 18:28:13 <sgk_> yes re: special meeting
159 18:28:24 <sgk_> 2275: 2.x p3 stevenknight +VisualStudio keyword
160 18:28:38 <sgk_> if not part of vs_revamp, part of other stuff I'm working on for Google Chrome
161 18:28:55 <Greg_Noel> Looks like #ERROR! to me... {;-}
162 18:29:09 <Greg_Noel> 2275, done
163 18:29:32 <Greg_Noel> (put a space in front of the plus)
164 18:29:55 <sgk_> 2276: stevenknight
165 18:30:01 <sgk_> yeah, i thought i fixed it already
166 18:30:39 <sgk_> 2277: stevenknight +VisualStudio
167 18:30:47 <sgk_> last minute or so
168 18:31:01 <Greg_Noel> 2276, okay, I'll presume you'll close it.
169 18:32:12 <sgk_> 2276: i'll close
170 18:31:10 <Greg_Noel> 2277, done
171 18:32:18 <sgk_> 2278: recruit swig guru
172 18:32:19 <Greg_Noel> 2278 can wait, but I think I'll contact him and see if he can be recruited.
173 18:32:25 <sgk_> +1
174 18:32:47 <sgk_> okay, gotta go
175 18:32:47 <Greg_Noel> Surprisingly, that's all
176 18:32:55 <sgk_> many thanks for the work
177 18:33:01 <Greg_Noel> I'll drop a line about another meeting; cul
178 18:33:15 <sgk_> l8r
179 18:33:17 * sgk_ has quit ("Leaving")
180
