Re: [Scons-dev] Python3 activity

Hi Vasily, On 25.01.2016 21:39, Vasily wrote: Any answer to my question about the place and approach for stubprocess to live in? Thanks, Vasily 16 янв. 2016 г. 0:17 пользователь "Vasily" > написал: I have started looking into the

[Scons-dev] Python3 activity

Will try to do some more on this over the weekend. I got stuck on the weird os.mkinfo problem (still unsolved) and got a bit distracted by Me TV rewrite ­required to be ready soon so as to watch the 6 Nations games. New DVB-T2 USB sticks arriving tomorrow. On the really up-side, it appears that

Re: [Scons-dev] Python3 activity

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Russel Winder wrote: > Aim is still to get the code-base working properly, i.e passing all > tests, as a Python 2.7 program, so that it can then become the default > branch. My thinking here is that if we do not have a separate branch, > but

Re: [Scons-dev] Python3 activity

I'm not going to merge any pull request for such until 2.5 is out though. Is anyone able to work on getting stubprocess logic into 2.5? If not I'll roll up 2.5 this weekend. -Bill On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Bill Deegan wrote: > +1. > > I'll see if I can get a

Re: [Scons-dev] Python3 activity

+1. I'll see if I can get a python 3.5 buildbot slave up soon. -Bill On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:01 AM, William Blevins wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Russel Winder > wrote: > >> Will try to do some more on this over the weekend.

Re: [Scons-dev] Python3 activity

I have started looking into the docs for integrating stubprocess in there. My current thoughts are to put it as a separate file next to posix.py in "Platform", any objections to this approach? Should I maybe put it to "compat"? Thanks, Vasily 15 янв. 2016 г. 21:05 пользователь "Bill Deegan"