William, Nothing that you've written to this email can be properly responded to with a brief look a the code or issues involved. So first let me say thank you for your persistence on working on this issue and looking deeper into SCons than most.
For myself I've been training for a half IronMan which has eaten up the bulk of my alotted open source participation time. Luckily that event is Sunday and so next week (assuming I survive ;) I'll have time to do a deep dig and give thoughtful comments. -Bill On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:23 PM, William Blevins <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah. The last few times I used the Dev list no one responded, so I just > wanted to make sure someone was out there somewhere :) > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Jason Kenny <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I have.. I plan to respond soon [image: Smile] >> >> Jason >> >> *From:* William Blevins <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 8, 2015 5:59 PM >> *To:* SCons developer list <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* Re: [Scons-dev] Cross-language support >> >> Is there anyone on this mailing list? >> >> I just want to make sure someone *might* have even read this email. >> >> V/R, >> William >> >> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:38 PM, William Blevins <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Team, >>> >>> Due to some upcoming real life events, I would like to wrap up the >>> cross-language scanner support materials by Sept 1, 2015. I was working >>> with Jason recently, but he got side-tracked with his own real life events. >>> >>> It is mostly complete. There are really only 3 remaining items that I >>> am aware (might be some other languages I cannot test). Details available >>> in the patch discussion: >>> https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-request/237/issue-2264-cross-language-scanner-support/diff >>> >>> TL;DR >>> 1. Recursive install scanning. This one is somewhat involved, but could >>> be easy if we decide to simply disable scanner recursion of the install >>> builder. Not sure if this is an option. >>> 2. Is the Ignore() for QT satisfactory? I assume yes. >>> 3. Is enforcing valid keys satisfactory? I can return the input if not >>> which will be similar to past behavior. >>> >>> V/R, >>> William >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Scons-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Scons-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
