[Scons-dev] SCons default branch open for python 2.7/3.x work. Please submit pull requests

[William Blevins]

That sounds fine to me.

On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com>
wrote:

> All,
>
> Here's what I propose.
> 1. Merge scons_python3 down to default.  It's o.k if it's broken for a
> bit. We can always do bug fixes out of rel_2.5.0 branch if needed and merge
> those down.
> 2. I'm o.k. with many tests failing when merged down to default. Python
> 2/3 is a major project and move forward for SCons.  As far as fixing those
> embedded code strings, I'd like to see a pull request per fix (so it's easy
> to review).   If we're talking about moving them to the new test fixtures
> (see: "working with fixtures" in
> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/wiki/DeveloperGuide/TestingMethodology),
> I'm all for that.
>
> 2+.  I'd say we should add some thing to TestSCons.py to return which
> version of python is being used and allow skipping tests the same way we do
> for different platforms for the time being.
>
> Once it's merged down to default, ideally the priority would initially be
> to get all the tests passing on python 2.7.  Then python3 compat.
>
> I know this is a departure from past workflows but I'm not sure how else
> to do this in a way that would enable moving fairly fast.
>
> Once we get to all tests working on python 2 & 3, then I'd like to shift
> back to a slower more deliberate process that's been our norm.
> I'm hoping this can be achieved in 2-3 months? (Does that seem realistic)
>
> During that time py2/3 pull requests will get priority, non py2/3 patches
> will be secondary unless there's a significant regression in 2.5.0 and/or
> support for new MSVS/VC or other "critical" toolset.
>
> If you make fairly small pull requests I'll make commitment to merge them
> quickly. (Assuming I'm not off the grid, which is a rarity).
>
> Thoughts on above most welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
> Co-Manager SCons project.
>
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 8:02 AM, William Blevins <wblevins001 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Two Questions,
>>
>> 1. Are we working out of scons__python3 or merging scons__python3 and
>> working there?
>>
>> 2. Many of the failing tests are from embedded code blocks in the tests
>> which futurize and six didn't update automatically. Should the update
>> process here be "make the embedded code its own file when reasonably
>> possible" or "just make minimal updates for now"?
>>
>> V/R,
>> William
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 12:25 AM, Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> It's (finally) that time.
>>> Please submit small pull requests if possible, rather than one with a
>>> million files/changes.
>>> (AIU) Bitbucket doesn't handle huge pull requests very well.
>>>
>>> I'll be setting up a python 3 buildslave.
>>>
>>> We'll be using futurize (If I remember correctly), how do we want to
>>> handle getting that package (and any requirement's it pulls in) installed?
>>> Embed? Add to setup.py? Other
>>>
>>> -Bill
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Scons-dev mailing list
>>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Scons-dev mailing list
>> Scons-dev at scons.org
>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160410/20c5b2ba/attachment.html>