nd other sources).
+1 for the idea to publish the final results to avoid "reparsing the wheel".
IMHO it could be interesting for new versions to have some kind
of "sys.stdlib_module_names" (as stated in SO). Why not proposing
it on python-ideas?
Regards,
francis
_
n't a issue that's
on stage:needs patch be marked “without patch” (not marked in that case)
and some that is on stage:patch review or above be always marked as
“keywords:patch” …?
Thanks in advance!
Regards,
francis
[1] https://docs.python.org/devguid
ssue is in need of a review.
patch
There is a patch attached to the issue.
3.3regression
The issue is a regression in 3.3.
[1] https://docs.python.org/devguide/triaging.html
Regards,
francis
___
core-workflow mailing list
core-work
with a small green icon nearby the patch).
Regards,
francis
___
core-workflow mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow
This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct:
https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
(A) get personalized,
(B) need to be open and (C) there is a loss of control?
PS: I'm just asking because from my experience cannot extrapolate
that points (it may be that my experience here is too small :-))
Thanks in advance!
francis
___
reject :-)).
[...] The interfaces
are all there, I think, to figure that out, but we'll need a bunch of
code to tie it all together.
and python is perfect for that ;-)
Regards,
francis
___
core-workflow mailing list
[email protected]
p8, bot-integration-tests, and that the patch still applies
without rework on the 2.7, 3.X tip(s)... (some of those step are
already doable now, but checks automation would be nice to have).
Regards,
francis
___
core-workflow mailing list
core-
