On Monday 29 August 2011 18:46:03 [email protected] wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2011, at 00:32, ext Hugo Parente Lima wrote:
> > On Monday 15 August 2011 09:07:50 [email protected] wrote:
> >> Thanks! Looking pretty good already - I'm assigning it PSEP 106
> >> (should've done it earlier already). I took the liberty of adding the
> >> post history and updating the discussion section for you. The latest
> >> version is here:
> >> 
> >> http://www.pyside.org/docs/pseps/psep-0106.html
> > 
> > shiboken module done!
> > 
> > It's already on mainline, i.e. it is going to be shipped on next PySide
> > release.
> 
> Ouch. Please hold a moment, I believe there has been slight
> misunderstanding of the process. The PSEP is still a draft and hence,
> can't be released in the mainline until it has been accepted. See PSEP 1
> for details:
> 
> http://www.pyside.org/docs/pseps/psep-0001.html
> 
> Basically, you should address the issues I raised, either by adding them to
> the PSEP, or convincing me why they're a bad idea.

Well.. no issues were raised since the last PSEP version 17 days ago, not a 
single word since your "Looking pretty good already" and the release wont be 
made today or tomorrow but in one month so the PSEP implementation is into the 
current sprint, I don't if you review it but it's there.

Anyway if the PSEP still a draft during the whole month until the release I 
can revert the commits before the release and raise the arm of the winner, 
bureaucracy... more than a month to decide an API with 7 plain functions, but 
fortunately I think this wont gonna happen.

Maybe I misunderstood you, but I thought that the PSEP was ready to be 
implemented, sorry.

> Cheers,
> 
> ma.

-- 
Hugo Parente Lima
INdT - Instituto Nokia de Tecnologia

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
PySide mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pyside.org/listinfo/pyside

Reply via email to