IrcLog2008 07 14

18:53:15  *      [GregNoel](GregNoel) is no longer marked as being away 
18:58:55  *      stevenknight (n=[stevenkn@69.36.227.131](mailto:stevenkn@69.36.227.131)) has joined #scons 
19:00:04  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Hi, Steven.  Gary has said he would likely be late; anybody else here for the bug party? 
19:00:21  <stevenknight> i don't see Bill, and he's the other stalwart 
19:00:57  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     And only you and I commented in the spreadsheet, and you didn't finish. 
19:00:59  <stevenknight> i'm just getting into the Current Issues spreadsheet -- I'm taking th late shuttle home tonight 
19:01:08  <stevenknight> right, just catching up 
19:01:17  <stevenknight> the existing comments were mine from last week 
19:02:03  *      garyo-home (n=[chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com](mailto:chatzill@209-6-158-38.c3-0.smr-ubr3.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com)) has joined #scons 
19:02:13  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Gary's not that late, after all 
19:02:24  <garyo-home>   Hi Greg. 
19:02:44  <garyo-home>   Hi, Steven. 
19:02:55  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Hey, Gary.  You said you would be late. 
19:03:23  <garyo-home>   Snuck out just in time, or mostly. 
19:03:43  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I think Steven is in a different window, updating the current issues spreadsheet; he should be back soon. 
19:03:36  <stevenknight> hey gary 
19:03:39  <garyo-home>   Hi 
19:03:43  <stevenknight> how'd your release go last week? 
19:03:56  <stevenknight> [GregNoel](GregNoel)'s ESP ++ 
19:04:12  <garyo-home>   Release went great.  I haven't got a lot of time for scons these days due to things at work. 
19:04:31  <garyo-home>   We're growing the company, got new investors, new CEO... lots of new & exciting stuff 
19:04:39  <garyo-home>   but it takes up all my time & then some. 
19:04:43  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     The disadvantage of working for a living... 
19:04:55  <garyo-home>   ...says the retired Unix guru. 
19:05:03  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     {;-} 
19:05:03  <stevenknight> :-) 
19:05:27  <garyo-home>   So anyway, that's all in apology for the fact that I haven't touched the spreadsheets. 
19:05:20  <stevenknight> well, shall we make as good use of the time as we can, then? 
19:05:39  <garyo-home>   Yes, let's dive in.  Current issues first? 
19:05:42  <stevenknight> i might disconnect briefly in ~10 minutes, i have to transfer shuttles 
19:05:45  <stevenknight> yes current issues 
19:05:47  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2124 
19:06:12  <stevenknight> 1.x p3 me 
19:06:20  <garyo-home>   ok w/ me. 
19:06:23  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I admit a traceback is unfriendly, and something should be done about that, but the problem is that ... 
19:06:34  <stevenknight> parts of the VS revamp will try to clean up some general windows issues 
19:06:40  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     he's really using a different name for the file. 
19:07:08  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     With that said, 1.x p3 makes as much sense as anything. 
19:07:23  <stevenknight> okay, let's go with it 
19:07:27  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     done 
19:07:29  *      bdbaddog (n=[bdeegan@adsl-71-131-30-2.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net](mailto:bdeegan@adsl-71-131-30-2.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net)) has joined #scons 
19:07:36  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Hey, Bill. 
19:07:39  <garyo-home>   2121 has come up a few times on the list, right? 
19:07:41  <garyo-home>   Hi Bill. 
19:07:51  <stevenknight> Bill! 
19:08:29  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Yes, and I think there may be dups, but I couldn't find them. 
19:08:41  <stevenknight> what is there about the confusing [VariantDir](VariantDir) feature that *hasn't* come up a few times on the list? 
19:08:46  <garyo-home>   The patch seems reasonable on the face of it. 
19:09:05  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     (patch?) 
19:09:19  <garyo-home>   212 has a patch and a test. 
19:09:23  <garyo-home>   sorry 2121. 
19:10:07  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Ah, it looks like that came along after I commented. 
19:10:09  <garyo-home>   Anyway, I agree w/ you guys on 1.x p2. 
19:10:38  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Yes, 1.x p2 is even stronger with a patch to work from. 
19:10:50  <stevenknight> yeah, 1.x p2 -- the patch looks good (haven't looked at the test case) and should be rewarded 
19:10:59  <garyo-home>   ok, good. 
19:11:01  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     done 
19:11:54  <garyo-home>   2122 is a way not to have to use src_builder iiuc? 
19:12:04  <stevenknight> right, essentially 
19:12:13  <stevenknight> let you add new src_builders dynamically 
19:12:13  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I don't know if this is the best API, but I agree that it something should be done. 
19:12:45  <stevenknight> and with some supported API so everyone doesn't have to cut-and-paste all the obj_builder stuff that's initialized in Tool/<ins>init</ins>.py 
19:12:43  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I published the long-promised requirements for better messages earlier today; that has a comment about this issue. 
19:13:10  <stevenknight> sounds good; i'll take a look when we're done 
19:13:12  <garyo-home>   func name is maybe not perfect but yes something like this is good. 
19:13:50  <stevenknight> any objections to sticking with 1.x p3? 
19:13:50  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I think better messages and this are indirectly related, so fixing one will have an impact on both 
19:14:04  <garyo-home>   But since it's an enhancement, I'd say low pri for 1.x (p3 max) or else later. 
19:14:27  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     My suggestion is the same as better messages, and I don't remember what that was assigned. 
19:14:53  <garyo-home>   1458? 
19:15:08  <garyo-home>   um, nope. 
19:15:09  <stevenknight> greg, what was the thread from earlier today re: better messages? 
19:15:12  <stevenknight> you have me intrigued now 
19:15:28  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     wiki [BetterMessages](BetterMessages) 
19:15:35  <stevenknight> okay 
19:15:36  <stevenknight> 2123: 
19:15:51  <stevenknight> consensus 1.x p2 ? 
19:15:58  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     fine with me 
19:16:09  <stevenknight> who? 
19:16:11  <garyo-home>   ok.  I can probably do it. 
19:16:42  <garyo-home>   It looks pretty easy. 
19:16:42  <stevenknight> okay, thanks -- just added your name to the spreadsheet 
19:16:45  <stevenknight> 2125: 
19:17:30  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2122: [http://scons.org/wiki/BetterErrorMessages](http://scons.org/wiki/BetterErrorMessages) 
19:17:41  <garyo-home>   2125: if Tools inherited from a base class, they wouldn't have to implement exists(). 
19:18:09  <stevenknight> have to switch buses, might drop momentarily 
19:18:46  <garyo-home>   ... and if they were subclasses it'd be easy to see what's a Tool. 
19:18:51  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Tools are not classes; they're modules (i.e., imported) 
19:19:34  <garyo-home>   Yeah (though there are other types, but classes aren't among them).  I guess we can't really change that. 
19:20:01  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Not easily; there's also the backward-compatible issue. 
19:20:22  <garyo-home>   A module can inherit stuff, but doing that just to avoid writing 'return True' seems overkill. 
19:20:52  <garyo-home>   I think this bug is making a mountain out of a molehill; should be 2.x low pri if anything. 
19:21:25  <garyo-home>   Greg, what you say in the ssheet is spot on. 
19:21:42  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I agree; it's overkill.  That's why I suggested wontfix. 
19:21:52  <garyo-home>   I agree, wontfix. 
19:22:13  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     If Steven makes it back without dropping, we can have a consensus. 
19:22:38  *      sgk_ (n=[stevenkn@69.36.227.135](mailto:stevenkn@69.36.227.135)) has joined #scons 
19:22:46  <garyo-home>   .. and here he is now. 
19:22:50  <sgk_> I'm back -- thought I was still connected but I guess not 
19:22:54  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     We'll probably be changing this interface with the toolchain stuff, but I'd like to leave it until then. 
19:23:09  <sgk_> still on the exists() thing? 
19:23:14  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Yes 
19:23:11  <garyo-home>   Greg & I say "wontfix" 2125. 
19:23:16  <garyo-home>   yes, exists(). 
19:23:35  <sgk_> do new-style classes allow it to be treated like gary was suggested (re: subclassing)? 
19:23:45  <sgk_> old-style classes definitely didn't 
19:24:04  <garyo-home>   don't know 
19:24:06  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I don't think so... 
19:24:15  <sgk_> okay, well not terribly important 
19:24:41  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     do we have a consensus? 
19:24:46  <sgk_> this was from a colleague lobbying me re: all the cut-and-paste "def exists(): return True" at the bottom of all the written modules 
19:24:58  <sgk_> wontfix is fine with me 
19:25:10  <garyo-home>   you can blame it on us. 
19:25:22  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     yeah, we're hardcore 
19:25:34  <sgk_> lol 
19:25:43  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2126? 
19:25:44  <sgk_> 2126 then: 
19:26:11  <sgk_> no real strong feelings so far -- any reason not to leave it 1.x p4? 
19:26:11  <garyo-home>   Having these as functions would be nice, I say 1.x p4 
19:26:25  <sgk_> done 
19:26:28  <sgk_> 2127: 
19:26:40  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Moving to Python 2.2 would allow these to be written as simple names, 
19:26:51  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     but that would require waiting until 2.x 
19:27:04  <sgk_> ah, that should be at least noted in the issue 
19:27:12  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     OK, wilco 
19:27:15  <sgk_> i'll add a comment in the background here 
19:28:18  <sgk_> 2127: 
19:28:53  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2127, I'd like to spin this off onto someone who has the background with all the variations. 
19:29:23  <garyo-home>   I do, but even with that it's not clear what the right answer is. 
19:29:23  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     But who?  I surely don't. 
19:29:32  <bdbaddog>     Good evening all. 
19:29:52  <garyo-home>   If a user says RPATH=XXX, should we try to provide those semantics by jiggling other linker args? 
19:29:57  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Hey, Bill... 
19:30:01  <garyo-home>   Hi, Bill. 
19:30:29  <bdbaddog>     Greetings finally back from HI, and then OC. phew. 
19:30:41  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Somehow, autoconf figures it out, since they support rpath, but ... 
19:30:44  <sgk_> sounds like there's enough uncertainty that 2127 should either be a research for someone 
19:30:55  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     ... the complexity looks intimidating. 
19:31:20  <garyo-home>   I'll be happy to research it.  But at some point scons has to say "this compiler doesn't support RPATH (or not well enough)" and punt. 
19:31:25  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Your research or my research?  They're different. 
19:31:21  <sgk_> or a 1.x-p3-and-reprioritize if "research" is too much of a backburner 
19:31:40  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Ah, your research. 
19:31:45  <sgk_> yours (i.e., should be investigated) 
19:31:49  <garyo-home>   I have a bunch of Macs with different OSes, so I can at least poke them all. 
19:31:49  <sgk_> heh 
19:31:58  <sgk_> okay, garyo research 
19:32:15  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     My research takes priority over 1.0, i.e., research it now. 
19:32:24  <sgk_> i think research should be Greg's interpretation (AIIU, investigate for reprioritization) 
19:32:31  <sgk_> but in practice that doesn't seem how we're handling it 
19:32:38  <sgk_> right 
19:32:51  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     but if Gary wants to do it, I'll let him have it. 
19:33:04  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     garyo research 
19:33:05  <garyo-home>   (Hmm, do I have any research items?  Not sure...) what I want is 1.x research (i.e. research as a priority) 
19:33:05  <sgk_> okay, gary, research 
19:33:30  <sgk_> that's kind of what I've morphed 1.x p3 into, mentally 
19:33:34  <garyo-home>   but I'll get something done on it. 
19:33:47  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     no, research and 1.x are both milestones; can't change the names of the priorities. 
19:33:51  <sgk_> I figure we're going to have a big reprioritization of 1.x issues at some point 
19:33:57  <sgk_> to break them down into manageable chunks 
19:34:04  <sgk_> cause there's just too much there right now 
19:34:12  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     You do have a talent for understatement {;-} 
19:34:44  <garyo-home>   oh well, that just means there may be lots of 1.x's 
19:34:59  <garyo-home>   (or we slip things til 2.0 of course) 
19:35:16  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Aye, there's the slip, er, rub 
19:35:21  <garyo-home>   anyway, 2128 is next... 
19:35:29  <sgk_> maybe.  we need to discuss releasing 1.0 (I think 0.98.5 has baked enough) 
19:35:32  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2128, David 
19:35:45  <sgk_> and when/how to branch so there's a place for relevant dev work 
19:35:54  <sgk_> 2128:  david 
19:36:04  <garyo-home>   2128 Includes doc patch, I say 1.0 or 1.0.x. 
19:36:15  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     True, but not quite yet; one issue later may need to be slipped in. 
19:36:23  <garyo-home>   Steven: yes, it's getting to that point. 
19:36:48  <garyo-home>   We can branch it any time and just merge things that need to go in. 
19:37:00  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     You're looking at 2129; no patch for 2128 
19:37:10  <sgk_> 2128:  1.0 for the doc patch 
19:37:19  <sgk_> ?  i see an attachment to 2128 
19:37:23  <garyo-home>   me too. 
19:37:39  <garyo-home>   a trivial two-liner. 
19:37:53  <sgk_> 2129 is another david Fortran thing, though 
19:38:22  <garyo-home>   2129: wow, a patch which is *just* a test. 
19:38:27  <sgk_> 2129:  anyone, anytime (it's an added test) 
19:38:29  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Yeah, but is it the doc or the implementation? 
19:38:45  <garyo-home>   2128: doc.  2129: test for implementation. 
19:39:02  <sgk_> no, greg's suggesting that although 2128 might "fix" the doc, 
19:39:12  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     OK, 2128 1.0 David, 2129 anytime 
19:39:13  <sgk_> the doc might be right (the *CPP* variables *should* be in the command line) 
19:39:16  <sgk_> and the code needs fixing 
19:39:22  <garyo-home>   aha, I see. 
19:39:57  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     David either way. 
19:40:00  <garyo-home>   We would need David to answer that. 
19:40:07  *      stevenknight has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 
19:40:14  <garyo-home>   there goes Steven. 
19:40:18  <sgk_> right, done 2128: david, 1.0, with a note about the doc-vs.-code 
19:40:20  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Ah, we just lost Steven... 
19:40:25  <sgk_> hey , where'd i go? 
19:40:39  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     vanished in to the AEther... 
19:40:46  <garyo-home>   hm, my irc client said your connection timed out. 
19:40:41  <sgk_> (that was the connection through the other bus timing out) 
19:41:04  <garyo-home>   I see. 
19:41:17  <sgk_> okay, 2129:  anyone, anytime 
19:41:28  <sgk_> 2130: 
19:41:50  <garyo-home>   2130, doc license issues: can we satisfy them somehow, maybe a CC license of some kind? 
19:42:03  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Have you figured out what he really wants? 
19:42:06  <garyo-home>   That would let you still print the UG? 
19:42:17  <sgk_> CC license would be the right thing, i suppose 
19:42:30  <sgk_> this is probably a research, me to figure out how where to draw the line 
19:42:38  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     OK, works for me 
19:42:44  <sgk_> yeah, they want to make the UG available on (e.g.) Debian 
19:43:01  <sgk_> but it's copyright me, not the SCons Foundation, and it's unclear if they can legallly do it 
19:43:03  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     although getting it into 1.0 would be good 
19:43:09  <sgk_> i'll sort it out 
19:43:14  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     OK, works for me 
19:43:20  <garyo-home>   ok 
19:43:28  <sgk_> just changed it to research (Greg's research) 
19:43:48  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Ah, really? 
19:44:04  <sgk_> well, i won't promise, but I do conceptually agree with it 
19:44:26  <garyo-home>   ok, 2131 (glob needs to sort)? 
19:44:28  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     I thought I understood the initial request, but not since. 
19:44:31  <sgk_> in practice, right now i'm prioritizing UG updates over research to get 1.0 out 
19:44:59  <sgk_> 2131:  is there any downside to making Glob() return a deterministic order? 
19:45:02  <sgk_> i can't think of one 
19:45:18  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     glob.glob doesn't sort; why should Glob? 
19:45:21  <garyo-home>   We should definitely sort it. 
19:45:31  <sgk_> principle of least surprise 
19:45:34  <garyo-home>   Who would want it in random order? 
19:45:45  <bdbaddog>     and you could use --random if you did... 
19:45:53  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     "least astonishment"  yes, you're probably right. 
19:46:00  <sgk_> having SCons rebuild things whenever it feels like it because you use Glob() seems really unehlpful 
19:46:23  <garyo-home>   right, I think this should be 1.0.x p2.  Easy and helpful. 
19:46:33  <bdbaddog>     gotta run. hey can someone look at my comments bug 243. I did some research and seems like a real bug where we thought it was doc bug before. 
19:46:53  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     later 
19:46:56  <sgk_> okay, we'll try to look at 243 
19:46:57  <sgk_> later 
19:47:03  <garyo-home>   bye 
19:47:14  <sgk_> 2131:  1.0.x p2? 
19:47:36  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     ok, I guess 
19:47:55  <garyo-home>   fine w/ me. 
19:48:12  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     2132 
19:48:34  <sgk_> 2132:  Ralf's fixes tend to be pretty good 
19:48:40  <sgk_> i haven't lookat the code on this one yet, though 
19:48:44  <sgk_> looked at 
19:48:45  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     sgk_, I'm pretty sure it was an earlier issue 
19:48:55  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     It uses subprocess 
19:49:00  <garyo-home>   Can we use subprocess.Popen()? 
19:49:16  <sgk_> should be able to, the compatibility layer has a subprocess module that works under 1.5.2 
19:49:27  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     we hope 
19:50:01  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     If we can't find the dup, I move for 1.0.x 
19:50:16  <sgk_> agreed 
19:50:22  <sgk_> 1.0.x... p3? 
19:50:28  <garyo-home>   That early?  OK I guess since there's a good patch. 
19:50:28  <sgk_> or p2? 
19:50:44  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     yes, and if we find the dup, make it the same. 
19:50:48  <sgk_> ~5 minutes until i leave the bus 
19:51:04  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     and we're not even out of the current issues... 
19:51:09  <sgk_> i'll volunteer to hunt for the dup 
19:51:12  <sgk_> so put my name on it 
19:51:16  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     ok, done 
19:51:24  <sgk_> two weeks' worth 
19:51:37  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     but only five new ones 
19:51:42  <sgk_> true 
19:51:47  <garyo-home>   2133: invalid, or should we try to handle [AddPostAction](AddPostAction) differently (no implicit dep on cmd)? 
19:51:53  <sgk_> 2133:  i think this case should work 
19:52:01  <sgk_> it used to, and it doesn't seem unreasonable 
19:52:09  <sgk_> ("should be made to work (again)" that is) 
19:52:33  <garyo-home>   [AddPostAction](AddPostAction) cmds don't really need to be dependencies anyway, so I agree. 
19:52:39  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     sounds like a hack... 
19:52:49  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Hmmm...  I think they do 
19:52:53  <garyo-home>   No, because [AddPostAction](AddPostAction) is not a builder. 
19:53:01  <sgk_> agree w/gary 
19:53:11  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     think of a local command that JFCLs through the binary 
19:53:12  <sgk_> plus it's easier to add an explicit Depends() if you really want that dependency 
19:53:18  <garyo-home>   Builder cmds should get auto deps, but not Pre/Post actions. 
19:53:20  <sgk_> than to shut it off 
19:53:26  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     the command should be rebuilt if it changes 
19:53:52  <sgk_> hmm, Greg i do see your point -- SCM purity would require it 
19:53:53  <garyo-home>   Greg: hm, I have to think about that. 
19:54:11  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     we're not going to settle this now; not enough time; resume here next time? 
19:54:14  <sgk_> since you can't know the [AddPostAction](AddPostAction)() is irrelevant 
19:54:22  <sgk_> works for me 
19:54:36  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     OK, then, when next? 
19:54:38  <garyo-home>   ok.  Same time, same place, next week? 
19:54:45  <sgk_> same time, etc. 
19:54:53  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     19h00?  or 17h00? 
19:55:02  <garyo-home>   1900 is good for me, how about you? 
19:55:07  <sgk_> 19h00 is fine with me 
19:55:13  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     fine with me 
19:55:16  <garyo-home>   Greg: I'll do the data entry this week from your irc log 
19:55:17  <sgk_> done 
19:55:25  <sgk_> gary:  thanks 
19:55:43  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     ok, although I have the time this week 
19:55:50  <sgk_> i'll probably start a release@ thread re: really releasing 1.0 
19:56:02  <garyo-home>   sgk_: I was just going to suggest that. 
19:56:14  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     good idea 
19:56:28  <garyo-home>   Greg: thanks but I think I can handle it, gotta contribute somehow... 
19:56:49  <garyo-home>   plus I'll be on vacation 23rd - 6th 
19:56:50  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     Personally, I'd rather you were editing the spreadsheets... 
19:57:06  <sgk_> disconnect in < 15 seconds, later 
19:57:08  <garyo-home>   OK, I agree.  I'll make some time for that too. 
19:57:19  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     ok, later 
19:57:24  *      sgk_ has quit ("Leaving") 
19:57:25  <garyo-home>   bye guys. 
19:57:29  <[GregNoel](GregNoel)>     cul 
19:57:35  *      garyo-home has quit ("[ChatZilla](ChatZilla) 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0/2008052906]") 
19:57:37  *      [GregNoel](GregNoel) has been marked as being away