Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > - Embedding Python by just compiling/linking all the .c files in > seems to be a major feature to me; so fixing compilation is useful > for its own
If that's the objective of the patch, I'm -1 on it. > - The win32 build system has never used "configure;make", but a > Visual Studio project file; so why require it for a MinGW build?! Well, if MingW could use the VS project files, that would be fine with me as well... We need *some* build procedure. Just being able to compile the source files is not maintainable. > It would be a "nice to have". But there is one thing: The patch in > its current form is trivial and next to impossible to break anything, > yet I'm sure it's useful for a number of people. It's a result of > work done within the company I'm working for. Submitting the patch > does not have an immediate benefit for my company, it only will save > me a (short!) amount of time because I will not to have to re-apply > the patch for every new Python release. This time saving is the only > justification for spending some working time to try to get it into > the official tree. Understood. Perhaps somebody else is interested in picking up the patch. BTW, you do have your employer's permission to contribute this work, right? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10615> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
