Re: [Distutils] build system requirements PEP, 3rd draft

Cool, thanks! On Mon, 16 May 2016 at 07:49 Donald Stufft wrote: > > On May 16, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > I'm at OSCON and in a tutorial on my work laptop so I didn't have a chance > to verify there weren't any reST errors, so if someone with

Re: [Distutils] windows SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED

DOH, To answer my own question: it's bootstrap.pypa.io not pypi... needed a different root cert. On 05/16/2016 09:20 AM, Adam GROSZER wrote: Hi, I have here an old windows server 2003R2 (winbot.zope.org). Recently updated python 2.7.0 to 2.7.11. Now running into SSL:

Re: [Distutils] comparison of configuration languages

On 16 May 2016 at 16:41, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: > As pointed out, it's a C lib. But as we all like writing tools, it wouldn't > be very hard to write a Python parser for the format. There is one (on PyPI - can't recall the name now, sorry). > But it's a bit

Re: [Distutils] comparison of configuration languages

The PEP has been accepted by Nick. Let's turn our thoughts to more productive topics rather than talking about a moot point. Cheers, Ian ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig

Re: [Distutils] comparison of configuration languages

1. again, ConfigObj is pure Python, supports nesting, and is read/write (so there is no need to template injectable config files (e.g., with \n, =, #;etc. must be escaped)) | PyPI: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/configobj/5.0.6 | Src: https://github.com/DiffSK/configobj | Docs:

Re: [Distutils] comparison of configuration languages

​Not asking for any change but has anyone looked at libconfig ? ​It looks quite interesting: simple grammar and nesting support. What do you think of it As pointed out, it's a C lib. But as we all like writing tools, it wouldn't be very

Re: [Distutils] build system requirements PEP, 3rd draft

> On May 16, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > I'm at OSCON and in a tutorial on my work laptop so I didn't have a chance to > verify there weren't any reST errors, so if someone with commit privileges > can just quickly run `make` on the peps repo to make sure I

Re: [Distutils] build system requirements PEP, 3rd draft

And the PEP is checked in! https://hg.python.org/peps/file/tip/pep-0518.txt I'm at OSCON and in a tutorial on my work laptop so I didn't have a chance to verify there weren't any reST errors, so if someone with commit privileges can just quickly run `make` on the peps repo to make sure I didn't

Re: [Distutils] build system requirements PEP, 3rd draft

On 16 May 2016 at 08:02, Nick Coghlan wrote: > More seriously, as BDFL-Delegate, I'm entirely happy with this > version. Thanks for your work in pulling this reduced scope PEP > together, as well as to Robert, Nathaniel and Donald in driving the > preceding build system

[Distutils] windows SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED

Hi, I have here an old windows server 2003R2 (winbot.zope.org). Recently updated python 2.7.0 to 2.7.11. Now running into SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED with buildout bootstrap. I installed DigiCertHighAssuranceEVRootCA.crt to "Certificates (Local Computer)\Trusted Root Certification

Re: [Distutils] build system requirements PEP, 3rd draft

On 14 May 2016 at 05:03, Brett Cannon wrote: > Biggest changes since the initial draft: > > 1. No more semantics-version > 2. No more [package] table > 3. Settled on [build-system] as the table name > 4. The "requires" key is required if [build-system] is defined > 5. Changed