Clone wiki

SCons / BugParty / IrcLog2010-06-01

16:08:25 * Jason_at_Intel (~chatzilla@ has joined #SCONS 16:49:47 * techtonik ( has joined #SCONS 16:51:42 * bdbaddog ( has joined #SCONS 16:59:43 * GregNoel is no longer marked as being away 16:59:32 * GregNoel has entered the building... 17:00:51 <bdbaddog> Good evening Greg! 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? 17:02:14 <bdbaddog> Sure. 17:04:39 * sgk (~sgk@nat/google/x-fhtfswcishgntsxo) has joined #SCONS 17:04:47 <sgk> yo 17:04:56 <GregNoel> And here he is; shall we get started? 17:05:16 <bdbaddog> +1 17:05:19 <sgk> let's do it 17:05:27 <GregNoel> 2545 consensus anytime p4 Greg 17:05:27 <GregNoel> 2627 consensus 2.1 p2 Steven 17:05:27 <GregNoel> 2628 needs a priority, but otherwise consensus research Steven; how about p3? 17:05:38 <sgk> p3 sounds good 17:05:58 <bdbaddog> +1 17:06:05 <Jason_at_Intel> +1 17:06:04 <GregNoel> done 17:06:18 <GregNoel> 2630 needs a priority, but otherwise consensus research Steven; how about p2? 17:06:28 <sgk> how about 2629? 17:06:58 <GregNoel> oops, yes 2629; getting ahead of myself 17:06:48 <sgk> since i took the 2628 (and likely 2630), how about 2629 => garyo? 17:07:26 <sgk> seems like he already looked at it, and he can kick it back if it's a problem 17:07:25 <GregNoel> works for me; what priority? 17:07:48 <sgk> since it's related to batching, p2 17:08:42 <sgk> maybe with a note inviting kicking it to me if it looks too tied to the other batching things 17:08:36 <GregNoel> no other opinion, done 17:08:43 <sgk> done 17:08:46 <GregNoel> try 26eo? 17:08:54 <GregNoel> 2630? 17:08:55 <sgk> 26eo: p2 17:09:04 <sgk> :-) 17:09:18 <bdbaddog> +1 17:09:23 <GregNoel> done 17:09:35 <GregNoel> 2631 consensus 2.1 p3 Rob 17:09:35 <GregNoel> 2632 consensus 2.1 p3 Rob 17:09:35 <GregNoel> 2633 17:10:03 <sgk> any barriers to inviting anatoly to update directly? 17:10:18 * sgk looks again at the bug itself... 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. 17:10:55 <sgk> agreed re: editing 17:10:57 <GregNoel> I'll volunteer to be his editor. 17:11:01 <sgk> that could be either you or me 17:11:04 <sgk> you 17:11:06 <sgk> thnx 17:11:10 <GregNoel> or you... 17:11:16 <sgk> no backs! 17:11:25 <GregNoel> or even both, depending on who's available. 17:11:37 <sgk> both sounds reasonable 17:12:04 <GregNoel> OK, I'll make him a committer and close the issue... hmmm, what status? 17:12:36 <sgk> depending on his cycles... 2.0 would be nice... p2? 17:12:38 <sgk> maybe even p1? 17:12:47 <sgk> there's a window of opportunity with 2.0 going out the door 17:13:09 <GregNoel> OK, I'll assign him the issue. 17:13:27 <GregNoel> 2.0 p1 tech<esc> 17:13:40 <sgk> done 17:14:02 <GregNoel> 2634 17:14:20 <sgk> garyo, ask for confirmation, close in two weeks if none? 17:14:37 <Jason_at_Intel> agreed 17:15:15 <bdbaddog> +1 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. 17:15:55 <sgk> okay 17:15:22 <GregNoel> done 17:15:37 <GregNoel> 2635 17:16:10 <sgk> does david cournapeau have any cycles for 2635? 17:16:27 <sgk> assign to him, ask for it back if he's still mired in finishing his thesis? 17:16:30 <GregNoel> Unfortunately, I have to admit my first language was FORTRAN, but David would be a better choice. 17:17:17 <sgk> let's give him a crack at it then 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.) 17:17:37 <sgk> agreed 17:17:37 <sgk> thnx 17:17:40 <GregNoel> done 17:18:06 <GregNoel> 2636 17:18:00 <sgk> 2636: i'm very much out of the loop on the packaging stuff, will go with consensus 17:18:21 <GregNoel> What happened to the student who wrote it? 17:18:30 <sgk> no idea 17:18:33 <sgk> was garyo mentor? 17:19:00 <GregNoel> Hmmm... Not me, so probably him. 17:19:16 <sgk> assign to garyo to follow up with student? 17:19:24 <GregNoel> good idea 17:19:54 <GregNoel> what milestone, priority? 17:20:02 <sgk> 2.1 p3 ? 17:20:59 <bdbaddog> +1 17:21:13 <Jason_at_Intel> +1 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. 17:21:26 <sgk> done 17:21:24 <GregNoel> done 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. 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. 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... 17:22:09 <sgk> "...see that it gets done..." it == ? 17:22:16 <sgk> the doc issues ? 17:22:23 <GregNoel> yes 17:22:54 <sgk> (break for shuttle in a few minutes) 17:23:07 <GregNoel> The antecedent is "assignments" so it should be "them." Mea culpa. 17:23:43 <sgk> i can do some assigning, but not sure who's in the volunteer pool 17:24:04 <sgk> (shuttle coming, biab) 17:24:06 * sgk has quit (Quit: sgk) 17:27:36 <GregNoel> techtonik, are you here? 17:28:00 * sgk (~sgk@ has joined #SCONS 17:28:13 <sgk> back (i think) 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. 17:28:49 <sgk> what'd i miss? 17:29:06 <bdbaddog> nada 17:29:12 <GregNoel> dead silence... 17:29:19 <sgk> heh 17:29:30 <bdbaddog> long day IRL 17:30:33 <sgk> okay, how about i just take a stab at reassigning the doc issues then 17:30:36 <sgk> might be random to start 17:30:39 <bdbaddog> so should we change the bootstrap logic to have a beta level ? 17:30:42 <sgk> but people can balk and then i can correct 17:30:54 <bdbaddog> and/or RC ? 17:31:12 <sgk> bdbaddog: not sure what you mean 17:31:16 <bdbaddog> so CHECKPOINT=beta|RC 17:31:22 <bdbaddog> in addition to d,r 17:31:31 <sgk> i already changed ".alpha." => to ".beta." in the SConstruct file 17:31:38 <sgk> for this last checkpoint 17:31:50 <sgk> but i just did it by hand, no configurability 17:31:40 <bdbaddog> k 17:31:57 <GregNoel> No, I'm about to check in something that will fix that, but I'm still testing it. 17:32:09 <sgk> cool 17:32:30 <sgk> are all of the 1.3.x fixes in the current .beta.20100531 checkpoint? 17:32:36 <bdbaddog> nope. 17:32:45 <bdbaddog> I need to merge the MSVC stuff over. 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. 17:33:50 <sgk> svnmerge can cherry pick 17:33:56 <sgk> just specify the revisions with -r 17:34:16 <GregNoel> I've got a partially-complete wiki page on how to cherry-pick; I can finish it and post it. 17:34:43 <bdbaddog> k. that'd be great 17:34:48 <GregNoel> Yes, it uses svnmerge 17:35:15 <sgk> very cool 17:35:19 <GregNoel> Give me a day or two to finish it and try it out. 17:35:31 <bdbaddog> hmm. o.k .was going to give it a wack tonight. 17:35:44 <sgk> bdbaddog: are the 1.3.x changes in the latest checkpoint? that is, they've gotten air time? 17:36:01 <bdbaddog> lateste 1.3 checkpoint yes. 17:36:14 <bdbaddog> though there's one bug or email about some initialization issues on vista. 17:36:41 <sgk> right, that's the one garyo replied to earlier today, yes? 17:36:48 <bdbaddog> yes 17:37:50 <sgk> if we take these in 2.0, do we need another checkpoint for them, or do we go with it? 17:38:16 <GregNoel> I'd rather not have another checkpoint. 17:38:47 <GregNoel> In fact, I'd rather go with the current checkpoint. 17:39:05 <sgk> i'm really loathe to ship something that regresses from 1.3.x 17:39:23 <sgk> especially in an area like the Windows initialization 17:39:11 <bdbaddog> ditto 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. 17:39:38 <bdbaddog> I can do the merge, and push out another checkpoint tonight/tomorrow? 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 17:40:12 <Jason_at_Intel> 2.0 should make it better or be the same as 1.3 17:41:07 <sgk> bdbaddog: i like your idea 17:41:25 <sgk> garyo is (i think) on vacation this week, any chance someone else can look at the outstanding vista issue? 17:41:46 <bdbaddog> sure. I can respond with the guy. 17:42:50 <sgk> thnx 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? 17:43:11 <sgk> i'll try to be online tonight, so if there's anything i can help with, le tme know 17:43:18 <bdbaddog> will do. 17:43:42 <bdbaddog> GregNoel - can u point me to your cherry picking page? is it useful though incomplete at this point? 17:44:16 <GregNoel> It's on my home wiki... 17:45:03 <GregNoel> I need a day to clean it up, at least; too many notes to self to be useful 17:45:11 <bdbaddog> 17:45:14 <bdbaddog> there? 17:45:52 <GregNoel> http://localhost:8000/ 17:46:38 <bdbaddog> ahh. yeah.. that's hard to get to from here.. ;) 17:47:04 <GregNoel> Only three firewalls to get through... 17:47:24 <bdbaddog> oh.. I thought you'd make it a real challenge.. ;) 17:47:43 <bdbaddog> Any other items for today? 17:48:18 <GregNoel> sgk, will you reassign the doc issues? 17:48:31 <sgk> yes 17:48:48 <GregNoel> Can you do it tonight? 17:49:33 <sgk> i think so 17:49:41 <sgk> tomorrow morning otherwise 17:49:52 <GregNoel> If we get them to people tonight, we might get some back for the next checkpoint. 17:50:52 <sgk> okay, if we finish here soon i may have time right now 17:51:47 <GregNoel> I don't think we have anything else... And my TiVo is sick; I need to go troubleshoot it. 17:52:03 <bdbaddog> k. sounds good to me. 17:52:04 <sgk> anyone have anything else to discuss? 17:52:17 <Jason_at_Intel> not here at the moment 17:52:26 <bdbaddog> nope. 17:52:35 <sgk> all right then, I'll peel off and go scatter some documentation issues to the wind 17:52:36 <GregNoel> Looks like we're done, so g'night all... 17:52:51 <Jason_at_Intel> bye 17:52:54 <bdbaddog> gnight as well 17:53:00 * GregNoel has left the building... 17:53:02 <sgk> bye 17:53:03 * Jason_at_Intel has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.5.3/20090824101458]) 17:53:06 * sgk (~sgk@ has left #SCONS 17:53:14 * bdbaddog ( has left #SCONS 17:54:18 * GregNoel has been marked as being away