00:29 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] drewrisinger opened pull request #1188: Fix #1186: list-methods of type-annotated class (master...dr-pr-issue-1186) https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/pull/1188

01:14 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on pull request #1188 7074615: Please remove the type annotations. https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/pull/1188#discussion_r230540724

12:16 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq pushed 1 new commit to release-3: https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/commit/ad07274a1b8b23f792b174a01cd65d30f65f6f54

12:16 <GitHub-m-labs> artiq/release-3 ad07274 Sebastien Bourdeauducq: Revert "relax test_pulse_rate"...

12:17 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/commit/7f11411127f000595aa6d2bcfe15eb8c1809f6ca

12:17 <GitHub-m-labs> artiq/master 7f11411 Sebastien Bourdeauducq: RELEASE_NOTES: 3.7

12:18 <sb0> bb-m-labs: force build --branch=release-3 artiq

12:18 <bb-m-labs> build forced [ETA 54m51s]

12:18 <bb-m-labs> I'll give a shout when the build finishes

12:19 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on commit f96084e: Only on master, fixed in https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/commit/7f11411127f000595aa6d2bcfe15eb8c1809f6ca https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/commit/f96084e88d857b04d4ee3c3eeb010da7cbd1e58a#commitcomment-31159075

12:26 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on issue #1007: > A proper solution here would probably be to completely change the semantics of ARTIQ Python to make it more amenable for analysis, but that's not going to fly in the 3.x branch,... https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/1007#issuecomment-435583943

12:30 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on issue #1115: @klickverbot Thanks, looks great! https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/pull/1115#issuecomment-435584212

12:33 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq pushed 12 new commits to master: https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/compare/7f11411127f0...abad91638337

12:33 <GitHub-m-labs> artiq/master cbfbe24 David Nadlinger: ttl: Remove broken TTLClockGen.sync...

12:33 <GitHub-m-labs> artiq/master 11e8c9d David Nadlinger: coredevice: Add Core.wait_until_mu()...

12:33 <GitHub-m-labs> artiq/master 17a5fb2 David Nadlinger: ttl: Remove error-prone sync() calls...

12:35 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] sbourdeauducq commented on issue #1137: How do we resolve this? With the new API, it can be done either in the documentation of functions like ``count()``, or by adding an offset to the passed value. https://github.com/m-labs/artiq/issues/1137#issuecomment-435584574

12:36 <sb0> bb-m-labs: force build artiq

12:36 <bb-m-labs> The build has been queued, I'll give a shout when it starts

12:51 <bb-m-labs> build #1961 of artiq-board is complete: Failure [failed conda_build] Build details are at http://buildbot.m-labs.hk/builders/artiq-board/builds/1961

12:51 <bb-m-labs> build #2660 of artiq is complete: Failure [failed] Build details are at http://buildbot.m-labs.hk/builders/artiq/builds/2660

12:51 <bb-m-labs> build forced [ETA 54m51s]

12:51 <bb-m-labs> I'll give a shout when the build finishes

12:53 <GitHub-m-labs> [artiq] klickverbot commented on issue #1137: I'd argue we should definitely add the offset internally. Without knowing about RTIO internals (i.e. for the typical user), it is pretty much impossible to reason about what is going on here. Thus, the current interface (i.e. with manually specified delays) is not only a leaky abstraction, but also one that leads to wrong-by-default code.... https://github.com/m

13:25 <bb-m-labs> build #1962 of artiq-board is complete: Success [build successful] Build details are at http://buildbot.m-labs.hk/builders/artiq-board/builds/1962

13:43 <bb-m-labs> build #1963 of artiq-board is complete: Success [build successful] Build details are at http://buildbot.m-labs.hk/builders/artiq-board/builds/1963

13:46 <bb-m-labs> build #2661 of artiq is complete: Exception [exception python_unittest_2 board_unlock_1] Build details are at http://buildbot.m-labs.hk/builders/artiq/builds/2661