On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Bill Deegan <b...@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@scons.org https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
