[Scons-dev] SCons and Python 3.0

[Bill Deegan]

Anatoly,

How long do the builds of wesnoth and blender take? (on a reasonable, but
not super fast/new machine)

-Bill

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:36 AM, anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com>
> wrote:
> > Greetings!
> >
> > I believe the goal should be that a single codebase would work on python
> 2.7
> > and 3.x
> >
> > Given that premise I think having a separate branch for 3.0 work would
> just
> > end up in much additional work.
> >
> > I'd like to add some python 3.0 buildslaves and then add small changes to
> > trunk which would work towards the goal of the code working on py 2.7 and
> > 3.x.
> >
> > Otherwise we'll have to maintain a longstanding branch for 3.0 work.
> > Since it's unlikely that such changes will be huge architectural changes,
> > but mainly should be minor code changes this should be a relatively safe
> > path..
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> You need to setup buildbots for all bug projects like Wesnoth and Blender
> etc. that use SCons. Then the harness will be fair. Otherwise there
> inevitably
> will be compatibility breaks. It is very easy to break things when going
> this
> way. 2/3 codebase is significantly harder to maintain. You insert something
> for Python 2 and it breaks Python 3 and vice versa. Some bugs are not
> evident at all, because the type of returned object changes and it may not
> support some methods that will be called down the chain. So my bet is that
> without the harness 80% chance that new scon5 will give headache to all
> its former users
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20150306/06fbcf96/attachment.html>