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
