[Scons-dev] Why we need to release separate SCons3 for Python 3

[Kenny, Jason L]

>>After reading the above, do you still think this is a poor 2-to-3 transition management scheme?

Given this statement:

>(Note that some simple SConstructs that just call the SCons API functions and don't do much python themselves may just work.  But we can't promise that, because people can use any python they want in >their SConstructs/SConscripts).


No I don't think this is bad scheme. I believe however we need to fill in the holes the best we can. Anyone can make non-portable build files in CMake, Ant, etc... The issue is can one easily make a build file portable if the tried. I believe at this time we have strong API weakness, that make this very hard to do. Given that we can make this a lot easier with newer Scons 2 drops with and SCons 3 drops, people have a means to make stuff portable before they try to make the jump at their own pace. The main issue at this point is that python 2 support is starting to be dropped, this makes it harder for us to make a better Scons as now there seems to be a ticking clock.

I would like to hear what anatoly techtonik thinks.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20130223/b59980c3/attachment.html>