On 1 November 2015 at 02:08, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:52 PM, Marcus Smith wrote:
>
>>> If python-dev ends up adopting GitLab for the main PEPs repo, then we
>>> should be able to move the whole process there, rather than needing to
>>> maintain a separate copy.
>>>
>>will that
On Oct 29, 2015, at 10:52 PM, Marcus Smith wrote:
>> If python-dev ends up adopting GitLab for the main PEPs repo, then we
>> should be able to move the whole process there, rather than needing to
>> maintain a separate copy.
>>
>will that be as open as pypa/interoperability-peps? if it's closed
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 at 22:53 Marcus Smith wrote:
>
>
>> If python-dev ends up adopting GitLab for the main PEPs repo, then we
>> should be able to move the whole process there, rather than needing to
>> maintain a separate copy.
>>
> will that be as open as pypa/interoperability-peps?
>
Proof of
> If python-dev ends up adopting GitLab for the main PEPs repo, then we
> should be able to move the whole process there, rather than needing to
> maintain a separate copy.
>
will that be as open as pypa/interoperability-peps?
if it's closed off such that only python devs can log PRs against PEPs o
On 28 October 2015 at 20:15, Ralf Gommers wrote:
> It's the "Watch" button on the right top of
> https://github.com/pypa/interoperability-peps
Doh. Thanks.
Paul
___
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/list
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 28 October 2015 at 18:44, Donald Stufft wrote:
> > On October 28, 2015 at 2:42:19 PM, Paul Moore (p.f.mo...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
> >>
> >> [1] If I'm supposed to be getting notifications for comments on the PR
> >> (as a member of the PyPA g
On 28 October 2015 at 18:44, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On October 28, 2015 at 2:42:19 PM, Paul Moore (p.f.mo...@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
>> [1] If I'm supposed to be getting notifications for comments on the PR
>> (as a member of the PyPA group, shouldn't I be?) then it's not
>> happening... I know I can
On October 28, 2015 at 2:42:19 PM, Paul Moore (p.f.mo...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> [1] If I'm supposed to be getting notifications for comments on the PR
> (as a member of the PyPA group, shouldn't I be?) then it's not
> happening... I know I can subscribe to the PR, but I'm not clear why I
> should
On 28.10.2015 19:33, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:31 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> On 28.10.2015 06:02, Ben Finney wrote:
>>> Marcus Smith writes:
>>>
1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
>>>
>>> Pl
On 28 October 2015 at 18:27, Ionel Cristian Mărieș wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:31 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Ben. Discussions on PEPs need to happen on mailing lists,
>> not hidden away on some issue tracker or PR ticket.
>
>
> I think some balance is needed here. Every s
On 28 October 2015 at 18:33, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> Also nothing precludes mailing list discussions, so without details
> about your objections, I don't see why this should be held up.
One immediate question - not at all FUD, nor intended as provocative,
it's a genuine question.
I thought right n
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:31 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> On 28.10.2015 06:02, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Marcus Smith writes:
>>
>>> 1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
>>> PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
>>
>> Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:31 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> I agree with Ben. Discussions on PEPs need to happen on mailing lists,
> not hidden away on some issue tracker or PR ticket.
>
I think some balance is needed here. Every so often discussions on the
mailing list get so disorganized and sli
On 28 Oct 2015 09:32, "Marcus Smith" wrote:
>
> my intention certainly wasn't to try to exclude anybody. for me, it's
the practical matter of the PR UI being more effective than a mailing list
thread (in this case referring to a gist), and that we can track proposals
easier and link to them from
On 28.10.2015 06:02, Ben Finney wrote:
> Marcus Smith writes:
>
>> 1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
>> PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
>
> Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where one can participate
> without needing to sign up with any pa
my intention certainly wasn't to try to exclude anybody. for me, it's the
practical matter of the PR UI being more effective than a mailing list
thread (in this case referring to a gist), and that we can track proposals
easier and link to them from issues (in that same repo) and other PyPA
docs.
Robert Collins writes:
> On 28 October 2015 at 18:02, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where one can
> > participate without needing to sign up with any particular service
> > provider.
>
> One has to sign up with the mailing list, so there's no functional
> d
On 28 October 2015 at 18:02, Ben Finney wrote:
> Marcus Smith writes:
>
>> 1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
>> PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
>
> Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where one can participate
> without needing to sign up with
Marcus Smith writes:
> 1) *Please*, *please*, *please* let's start doing PEP conversations as
> PRs to pypa/interoperability-peps : )
Please keep the conversation on a mailing list where one can participate
without needing to sign up with any particular service provider.
Your proposal would hav
19 matches
Mail list logo
