IrcLog2008 06 02

William Deegan edited this page Jan 14, 2016 · 2 revisions
16:23:54  *      bdbaddog (n=[bdeegan@adsl-71-131-1-136.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net](mailto:bdeegan@adsl-71-131-1-136.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net)) has joined #scons 
16:59:39  *      jrandall (n=[jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca](mailto:jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca)) has joined #scons 
17:00:32  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Steven and Gary have said they will be late; who else is here for the bug party? 
17:00:52  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  And Gary may not make it at all. 
17:01:18  <jrandall>     here, but after looking through the current list of bugs, there's not a lot I have to add to them 
17:01:40  <jrandall>     Had a hard time getting into 2007Q3.   Any known problem with that spreadsheet? 
17:02:08  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, just the usual.  Nobody has figured out the exact magic needed. 
17:03:00  <jrandall>     Hrm, I had it opened view-only in another tab, maybe that vexed it for some reason.   I'll try again later to see if it likes me then 
17:03:24  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Apparently, that's one no-no. 
17:03:55  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Could you add that note to the [ReadWrite](ReadWrite) page? 
17:04:00  <jrandall>     Sure thing 
17:04:44  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Bill, are you there?  Or was that an automatic connection? 
17:06:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Apparently not.  Only two isn't a quorum, but we can wait a bit and see if Steven or Gary show up. 
17:06:48  <jrandall>     Sure thing 
17:06:48  *      chit-chat while wating for quorum 
17:12:54  *      stevenknight (n=[stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net](mailto:stevenkn@c-69-181-234-155.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)) has joined #scons 
17:13:12  <stevenknight> hi, who's here? 
17:13:23  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  nobody 
17:13:31  <stevenknight> damn 
17:13:39  <jrandall>     aye, 'tis quiet 
17:14:11  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Gary is caught at work and may not make it. 
17:16:43  <bdbaddog>     Hi All. I'm here til about 5:30ish. 
17:17:00  <stevenknight> hi bill 
17:17:09  <bdbaddog>     Good Day! 
17:17:31  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Hey, Bill. 
17:17:13  <stevenknight> i just got connected myself, shall we dive into the current issues? 
17:17:39  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Sure 
17:17:38  <stevenknight> 2073:  moot, already fixed 
17:17:56  <stevenknight> 2074:  consensus 2.x p2 
17:18:14  <stevenknight> 2076:  consensus 1.x p1 
17:18:43  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Geeze, let me catch up. 
17:19:20  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2074, 2076, done 
17:19:30  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2077 
17:19:37  <stevenknight> oh, 2076:  we should assign to someone, yes? 
17:19:54  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Assign Bill 
17:20:01  <stevenknight> works for me 
17:20:10  <bdbaddog>     oh boy. imagine if I wasn't here.. ;) 
17:20:17  <stevenknight> 2077:  consensus 1.x 
17:20:28  <stevenknight> two votes (kind of) for p4, any objections? 
17:20:43  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Er, 2077 assign Bill; I'll look at 2076 
17:20:56  <stevenknight> okay 
17:20:57  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  unless Bill wants it 
17:21:35  <bdbaddog>     nope. but I'll take a look at 2077. might be 2 weeks as I have trade show next week, before I get a chance. 
17:21:45  <stevenknight> done 
17:21:47  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
17:22:03  <stevenknight> 2078:  1.x, p2, me (along with other Visual Studio / VC work) 
17:22:21  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  ok 
17:22:39  <stevenknight> (the reprioritization after 1.0 is released is going to be fun...) 
17:22:49  <stevenknight> 2079:  2.x, greg? 
17:23:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Hmmm...  OK, I guess 
17:23:14  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  what priority? 
17:23:28  <stevenknight> sounds like you have a handle on it 
17:23:37  <stevenknight> I don't quite grok why a File.Grep() method 
17:23:54  <bdbaddog>     it's like Glob() but with regular expressions.. 
17:24:00  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  It's not obvious when to use f.name and str(f) 
17:24:09  <stevenknight> as opposed to some more generic method that might also grep for Dir, Alias, Value... 
17:24:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, no, no, it looks at file contents. 
17:24:39  <stevenknight> ah 
17:24:41  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Like a scanner. 
17:24:50  <bdbaddog>     oh. I thought from the emails, the requestor wanted to grep the file names,not contents. 
17:25:10  <stevenknight> yeah, like Filter (and [FilterOut](FilterOut)) in Ant 
17:25:25  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, he wanted to scan for 'int main(' to locate the main programs 
17:25:28  <bdbaddog>     o.k. never mind just reread. 
17:25:44  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Maybe those are better names (FilterIn/Out) 
17:25:55  <stevenknight> well, they imply matching names, not file contents 
17:26:02  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Ah, true. 
17:26:05  <bdbaddog>     yes. sounds clearer, Grep makes me think Glob but Regex. 
17:26:13  <stevenknight> i guess rather than add a special method (IMHO) 
17:26:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  (yes?) 
17:26:47  <stevenknight> i'm more interested in giving File nodes a read() method 
17:26:57  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Hmmmm...... 
17:26:58  <stevenknight> that looks like normal Python file objects 
17:26:59  <bdbaddog>     ahh. I like that even more. 
17:27:12  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I think I do, too 
17:27:14  <stevenknight> and then let people manipulate f1.read() using normal Python 
17:27:41  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Yes, good idea.  I'll write it up that way. 
17:27:49  <stevenknight> okay, thanks 
17:27:57  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  next? 
17:28:16  <stevenknight> 2080:  TASK 
17:28:32  <stevenknight> i forget, how are we marking items like this?  1.0 and just move them along? 
17:28:39  <stevenknight> i.e., things that can be done any time 
17:28:42  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  How about David as a release team member? 
17:28:50  <stevenknight> ++ 
17:28:58  <bdbaddog>     I think he said he didn't have enough time though. 
17:29:03  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, I make up something 
17:29:48  <stevenknight> ?? 
17:29:48  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I don't think being on the mailing list would be a problem; I'd appreciate his insight for the spreadsheets. 
17:30:07  <stevenknight> agreed 
17:30:12  <bdbaddog>     sounds good. 
17:30:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  "make up something" === try to guess when it would be done; it's what the not-research items should be. 
17:30:54  <stevenknight> okay 
17:31:17  <stevenknight> 2081:  consensus 1.x p2 
17:31:29  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I can create something for backburner issues, but "backburner" is not a name that delights me. 
17:31:51  <stevenknight> "backburner" to me would be implied by the priority 
17:32:02  <stevenknight> since the target milestone is really about timeframe 
17:32:07  <stevenknight> how about an explicit "anytime" 
17:32:09  <stevenknight> ? 
17:32:20  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Hmmm....  I'll look at that 
17:32:24  <stevenknight> okay 
17:32:34  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2081: done 
17:33:12  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2082: split between p2 and p4 
17:33:15  <stevenknight> 2082:  i meant 1.x 
17:33:18  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  (both 1.x) 
17:33:41  <stevenknight> so 1.x, and p3? (split the difference) 
17:33:47  <bdbaddog>     Looks like just needs some tests to be able to be applied right? 
17:33:56  <bdbaddog>     Do we have much coverage on rc files? 
17:34:18  <stevenknight> not a lot 
17:34:23  <stevenknight> i was just dealing with rc file today 
17:34:34  <stevenknight> so i'd put my name on this one, too 
17:34:39  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  works 
17:35:03  <bdbaddog>     O.k I"m a pumpkin. I've gotta head to class. 
17:35:04  <stevenknight> 2083:  looks like consensus 1.x p2 
17:35:08  <bdbaddog>     Good evening to all. 
17:35:10  <stevenknight> later 
17:35:13  *      bdbaddog has quit ("Leaving.") 
17:36:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2083: yeah, but we need to talk about the model. 
17:36:16  <stevenknight> fire away 
17:36:28  <stevenknight> or did you mean on the ML? 
17:36:25  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Maybe not right now, but there needs to be some agreement on how to do it. 
17:36:45  <stevenknight> okay 
17:37:09  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  ML would be fine; the last time I wrote a suggestion about it, it just died away, and I still don't have any real ideas 
17:37:34  <stevenknight> yeah, i may be the only one who cares about it in practice 
17:37:44  <stevenknight> purely because of wanting to do everything that Make does... :-) 
17:37:46  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, I do 
17:37:58  <stevenknight> no, i mean cares whether there is a mechanism that works 
17:38:06  <stevenknight> i think most people want it to just go away... :-) 
17:38:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  The real problem is less-than-clean removals 
17:38:17  <stevenknight> ah, right 
17:39:08  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  If it were only creating "cleaner" levels, it would be easy, but you want to be able to clean out, say, just the intermediate files 
17:39:17  <stevenknight> right 
17:39:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I just don't have any good idea for how to do thatt. 
17:39:45  <stevenknight> so for now:  1.x, p2, and either you or I to lead discussion (even if it's just between the two of us)? 
17:39:52  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  works 
17:40:03  <stevenknight> either that or "research" since we're still not sure 
17:40:23  <stevenknight> your choice, 1.x or research 
17:40:48  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1.x; that'll force us to look at it at a specific time 
17:40:52  <stevenknight> good 
17:41:02  <stevenknight> 2084:  i'm clueless 
17:41:07  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  2084, where's Gary? 
17:41:17  <stevenknight> we could make it research, garyo 
17:41:29  <stevenknight> just so he doesn't escape completely unscathed by not showing up...  :-) 
17:41:35  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'll buy that! 
17:41:43  <stevenknight> done 
17:41:49  <jrandall>     lol 
17:42:20  <stevenknight> 2085:  1.0, p4 (split difference), me 
17:42:28  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
17:42:53  <stevenknight> i have doc changes teed up for once i get 0.98.5 out (I hope later this evening, this past weekend was overrun by daughter's birthday) 
17:43:12  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Happy birthday; daughters are dangerous 
17:43:30  <stevenknight> oh my goodness yes 
17:43:34  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  how old? 
17:43:39  <stevenknight> 10 
17:43:44  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  ouch! 
17:44:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I remember my niece at ten....  oh, my, are you in for it! 
17:44:25  <stevenknight> yeah, I'm right on the cusp of going from being cool Dad to the biggest dork in the world 
17:44:46  <stevenknight> mind you, that last bit isn't much of a stretch... 
17:45:20  <stevenknight> anyway, 2007 q2? 
17:45:32  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  er, q3? 
17:45:41  <stevenknight> oh, right, q3 
17:45:48  <stevenknight> i was working ahead a little on q2 
17:46:20  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1869 
17:46:51  <stevenknight> ? 
17:46:55  <stevenknight> i have 1687 as the first? 
17:47:01  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  fixed 
17:47:08  <stevenknight> ah 
17:47:39  <stevenknight> 1689:  consensus 1.x, 
17:47:55  <stevenknight> p2? 
17:48:14  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Another one that needs some discussion after a bit of research, but 
17:48:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  p2 is a reasonable time to do it. 
17:48:27  <stevenknight> right 
17:48:43  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  OK, done 
17:49:08  <stevenknight> assign to...?  you (maybe [ParseConfig](ParseConfig)), me (I might know what's going on), leave blank for now? 
17:49:41  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  blank, actually issues@scons 
17:49:55  <stevenknight> okay 
17:50:09  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I don't think it was backtick 
17:50:27  <stevenknight> maybe not 
17:50:04  <stevenknight> 1690:  research, me (Visual Studio stuff) 
17:50:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1690, done 
17:50:52  <stevenknight> 1691:  documentation, 1.0, me 
17:51:14  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
17:51:28  <stevenknight> 1692:  research, me (Visual Studio again) 
17:51:29  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  may need to follow up to see what the message was 
17:51:40  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1692, done 
17:51:52  <stevenknight> 1693:  consensus 1.x p2 
17:52:08  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
17:52:09  <stevenknight> good manageable bug for someone else to take 
17:52:15  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  yes 
17:52:28  <stevenknight> 1697:  research, me (Visual Studio) 
17:52:47  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  okay 
17:53:16  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1701, ditto 
17:53:17  <stevenknight> 1701:  research, me (Visual Studio) 
17:53:19  <stevenknight> right 
17:53:20  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
17:53:34  <stevenknight> it isn't the pipes thing, it has to do with how we look in the #*@&(#$ registry for various info 
17:53:56  <stevenknight> 1702:  same... 
17:54:02  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1702, ditto 
17:54:10  <stevenknight> man, there's a lot of Visual Studio cruft piling up 
17:54:26  <stevenknight> I'm really itching to get in there and clean this stuff up 
17:54:50  <stevenknight> 1703: 
17:54:52  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Do you want a keyword for it?  I can set it up, but you'll have to assign them all. 
17:54:56  <stevenknight> not sure about my 1.x p3 
17:55:04  <stevenknight> keyword:  yes 
17:55:17  <stevenknight> "[VisualStudio](VisualStudio)" seems logical 
17:55:30  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  do you mean 1704? 
17:55:39  <stevenknight> oh, yes 1704: 
17:56:00  <stevenknight> 1704:  seems like if it were really crucial more people would have asked for it 
17:56:07  <stevenknight> i only know of this one patch 
17:56:19  <stevenknight> on the other hand, it kind of goes along with what Russel was saying on the ML today 
17:56:33  <stevenknight> about how SCons really doesn't have much traction in the Java community 
17:56:35  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  There was something on the mailing list about JAR() recently, maybe today? 
17:56:46  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  oops, you already said that 
17:56:47  <stevenknight> yeah, Russel's threads 
17:57:00  <stevenknight> let's leave it p3 
17:57:06  <stevenknight> since there's already a patch 
17:57:07  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  OK 
17:57:25  <stevenknight> if we ever are going to do better with Java, it can't hurt to have this already supported 
17:57:32  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Maybe draft a Java specialist to keep us on track 
17:57:50  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Maybe Russel? 
17:57:58  <stevenknight> maybe 
17:58:09  <stevenknight> he tends to appear and reapper in fits and starts 
17:58:14  <stevenknight> disappear i mean 
17:58:47  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'll write him about creating a wiki page with what's needed for Java support 
17:58:56  <stevenknight> hmm, i thought i recalled there was someone else who showed up on the ML with some Java knowledge a month or two ago 
17:59:09  <stevenknight> maybe i'm making that up 
17:59:22  <stevenknight> well, it can't hurt to ask, anyway 
17:59:24  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  No, I have his name 
17:59:37  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'll ask them both 
17:59:43  <stevenknight> good idea re: wiki page 
17:59:49  <stevenknight> sounds good 
18:00:35  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  anyway, what did we decide about 1704? 
18:01:04  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1.x, p2, you? 
18:01:21  <stevenknight> done 
18:01:58  <stevenknight> 1705:  1.x, jim ...  p3? 
18:02:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  or p2 
18:02:09  <jrandall>     Aye - I've got a patch in that fixes it 
18:02:24  <stevenknight> jrandall++ 
18:02:32  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  bravo! 
18:02:47  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  p2 then? 
18:02:48  <jrandall>     thanks. 
18:02:52  <stevenknight> yeah, p2 
18:02:55  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
18:03:23  <stevenknight> 1706:  1.x, but now i'm not sure of priority 
18:03:50  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'll look at it, maybe p4? 
18:04:02  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  It's part of getting symlinks right. 
18:04:16  <stevenknight> sure, 1.x, p4, you 
18:04:21  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
18:04:44  <stevenknight> 1707: consensus 2.x p4 
18:04:53  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done, or future? 
18:05:26  <stevenknight> hmm, i'm torn 
18:05:38  <stevenknight> part of me says future because no one seems to have asked for it 
18:05:47  <stevenknight> but maybe 2.x because there's already code 
18:06:06  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Yeah, but infected 
18:07:12  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Let's leave it at 2.x p4 and revisit later 
18:07:24  <stevenknight> okay 
18:07:31  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1708, I'll go with Ken to look at it. 
18:08:00  <stevenknight> 1708:  okay 
18:08:15  <stevenknight> I may need to take it back if he doesn't pop up again 
18:08:26  <stevenknight> but we should at least see if he can take it 
18:08:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  If he doesn't like it, he can kick it elsewhere. 
18:08:32  <stevenknight> yeah 
18:08:38  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'll put that in the note. 
18:08:43  <stevenknight> okay 
18:09:14  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1711, quite a mix 
18:09:18  <stevenknight> 1711:  yeah 
18:09:30  <stevenknight> when in doubt, shade to the earlier target 
18:09:37  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Huh? 
18:09:46  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Oh, I see. 
18:09:55  <stevenknight> i tend to go with the earlier/earliest milestone 
18:10:26  <stevenknight> i'd rather make sure it gets considered and reprioritize to later if necessary 
18:10:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Let's make it 1.x then and give it to Gary, since he's not here 
18:10:48  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  p3? 
18:10:53  <stevenknight> ah, good idea -- he's done subst stuff 
18:10:54  <stevenknight> yes, p3 
18:10:58  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
18:11:17  <stevenknight> 1712:  2.x, p3 
18:11:27  <stevenknight> perhaps Benoit if we want to assign it 
18:11:32  <stevenknight> he's good at things like this 
18:12:00  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I'd want measurements.  I don't think scanners are that slow. 
18:12:19  <stevenknight> good point, they're probably not 
18:12:26  <jrandall>     Aye.   Not clear where the tradeoff would be as to whether it'd be worth it or not 
18:12:37  <jrandall>     Most of mine, it wouldn't be worth spawning 
18:12:46  <stevenknight> actually, (off topic) i have an optimization i'm thinking of that I'd like to discuss with you some time 
18:13:02  <stevenknight> let's get through bugs first though 
18:13:19  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  In fact, I think a small rewrite so that scanners overlap with the previous command would cure it. 
18:13:36  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  I do that in TaskmasterNG 
18:13:42  <jrandall>     nice 
18:13:43  <stevenknight> oh, very cool 
18:13:48  <stevenknight> simple and effective 
18:14:14  <stevenknight> 1714:  1.x, p3 
18:14:15  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Is that the optimization? 
18:14:59  <stevenknight> no, it's basically trying to make searching CPPPATH O(1) instead of O(n) 
18:15:06  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1714, agreed, but spin off JAR to another issue 
18:15:16  <stevenknight> 1714: agreed 
18:15:26  <stevenknight> 1.x, p3, garyo 
18:15:38  <stevenknight> could also go to Russel or whoever gets to be Java guru 
18:15:53  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done; I'll note that 
18:16:13  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  OT: yes, they should be hashed better. 
18:16:16  <stevenknight> good 
18:16:43  <stevenknight> OT: actually, even beyond that, the search is attached to the wrong object 
18:16:51  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1717, you, VS 
18:17:07  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  OT: yes, I've noticed that 
18:17:08  <stevenknight> 1717:  yes 
18:17:15  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
18:17:41  <stevenknight> 1722:  it's Bill's, let's WONTFIX it...  :-) 
18:17:52  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1720, has Bill left? 
18:18:05  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  oops, 1722 
18:18:10  <stevenknight> yeah he's gone 
18:18:19  <stevenknight> so he gets what he deserves... :-) 
18:18:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  OK, WONTFIX unless he provides a test case 
18:18:37  <stevenknight> done 
18:19:00  <stevenknight> 1723:  can this be part of the toolchain stuff you and Gary have on the backburner? 
18:19:10  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  yes 
18:19:15  <stevenknight> oh, yeah, your comment even *says* that... 
18:19:21  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  yup 
18:19:32  <stevenknight> future, you? 
18:19:36  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done 
18:19:51  <stevenknight> 1730:  1.x, p3, Rob? 
18:20:33  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Uh, maybe not Rob 
18:21:11  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Oops, I was thinking of another issue; yes, Rob. 
18:21:19  <stevenknight> okay 
18:21:27  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  It's a little out of his area, but he can work with you. 
18:21:56  <stevenknight> okay 
18:22:21  <stevenknight> 1735:  research, Rob? 
18:22:30  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  1735, what if it's still a bug?  Where to put it? 
18:22:56  <stevenknight> I'm agnostic -- 1.x p3? 
18:23:22  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  works; I'll tell him to contact me if he needs to 
18:23:27  <stevenknight> done 
18:23:39  <stevenknight> 1716:  research, me, [VisualStudio](VisualStudio) 
18:23:57  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done; quit for the evening? 
18:24:02  <stevenknight> yeah, i have to run 
18:24:06  <stevenknight> real quick re: CPPPATH 
18:24:06  *      off-topic discussion between stevenknight and [GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel) 
18:30:36  <stevenknight> okay, really gotta run 
18:30:39  <stevenknight> thanks! 
18:30:39  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  When shall we all meet again? 
18:30:39  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  In thunder, lightning, or in rain? 
18:30:39  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  Where the place, ...  same time next week? 
18:30:52  <stevenknight> oh, damn, that's right 
18:30:57  <stevenknight> yes, default, same time and place 
18:31:01  <[GregoryNoel](GregoryNoel)>  done; cu 
18:31:05  <stevenknight> l8r 
18:31:06  *      stevenknight has quit ("Leaving") 
18:31:07  <jrandall>     see you 
18:31:09  *      jrandall (n=[jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca](mailto:jim@bas1-london14-1088933074.dsl.bell.ca)) has left #scons 

Clone this wiki locally
You can’t perform that action at this time.
You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session. You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.
Press h to open a hovercard with more details.