Re: [Scons-dev] SCons and Python 3.0
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 wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Bill Deegan > 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 > ___ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
Re: [Scons-dev] buildbot.scons.org may be down for about an hour due to DNS issues..
Real life issues have delayed. Probably get back to it mid next week. On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:38 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote: > I see. How is the upgrade going on, anyway? =) > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Bill Deegan > wrote: > > Anatoly, > > > > That wasn't anything to do with upgrade. Just DNS changes. > > -Bill > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 2:34 PM, anatoly techtonik > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> http://buildbot.scons.org/ still has 0.8.8rc1. Did upgrade gone wrong? > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Bill Deegan > >> wrote: > >> > It'll probably point to my baddogconsulting.com website until the dns > >> > update > >> > propagates. > >> > > >> > ___ > >> > Scons-dev mailing list > >> > Scons-dev@scons.org > >> > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> anatoly t. > >> ___ > >> Scons-dev mailing list > >> Scons-dev@scons.org > >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > > > > > > > > ___ > > Scons-dev mailing list > > Scons-dev@scons.org > > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > > > > > > -- > anatoly t. > ___ > Scons-dev mailing list > Scons-dev@scons.org > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > ___ Scons-dev mailing list Scons-dev@scons.org https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
Re: [Scons-dev] SCons and Python 3.0
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Bill Deegan 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
