+1 what Dirk & Gary said with the following addition. If you're going to start from default again, then branch to a different python3 branch "python3-futurize".
Otherwise if someone will take a look at https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-requests/298/fix-for-tigris-bug-2622-alwaysbuild-msvc/diff and approve/decline it, I'll merge that in and get 2.5 release out. Then default would be open for python 3 efforts. -Bill On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Dirk Bächle <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > > On 25.01.2016 10:39, Russel Winder wrote: > >> I am having difficulty making a decision… >> >> The earlier Python 3 branch is founded on using six. At the time a good >> decision. Now however we have agreed that 2.7 is the base version and >> thus future rather than six is the better tool for Python 3. This >> brings into doubt the python3-port branch as a good base of operations. >> >> > here's my 2 cents: For me the major point is to have a combined > Python2.7/3.x version at all, and if you guys (thinking of Russel and > William right now) get the impression that starting from scratch with > "futurize" is the better plan...please do so. You're doing the hard work > towards this goal at the moment, so you should be free to decide how to get > there, in my opinion. > And if this means that some users will later on complain about the > dependency to "futurize", well I'd let it happen... > I see a greater overall benefit for the project in getting "some work > done", than in "discussing things to death, due to fear of the unknown". ;) > I'd second Gary, you might want to have a short look at his change > sets...and if you still feel like starting from scratch afterwards, just go > for it. > > Best regards, > > Dirk > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
