Hi guys,
sorry for chiming in so late.
On 28.07.2015 23:44, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:
Yes, that's how we've done it in the past. Sounds like doing it at the same
time as slots would be perfect.
Doing this in parallel with the "slots" change sounds good to me too. +1
-- Gary
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Bill Deegan <b...@baddogconsulting.com
<mailto:b...@baddogconsulting.com>> wrote:
Gary,
For such a change we should bump the second digit?
2.4?
I agree we should not turn down a change because it will cause rebuilds
where the past didn't as long as it is now more correct
(which it should be with this change).
Yes, "forward" is the way to go. ;)
Also agree we should be verbose in our notification of the impacts of the new change
to avoid (as much as we can) "surprises".
I think (better: hope) we did a good enough job for the "slots" stuff on this. For the scanner changes, I see them more like a
fix...so a single announcement should be sufficient?
Finally, and just in case I haven't done so already, I'd like to thank William for all the work he's done on this issue. I couldn't
help as much as I would've liked, but with Gary's support you tackled this down and brought it to a good end. Kudos to you...bravo!
Best regards,
Dirk
_______________________________________________
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
