On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> The reason I think "bootstrap" is a better name at this point
I *really* don't want to add to the bike-shedding of the name at this point
-- I really don't care.
I was just trying to see if I was misunderstanding something, as it didn't
see
On Mon, 9 May 2016 at 06:42 Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 7 May 2016 at 08:21, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On 6 May 2016 at 19:14, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >> OK, assuming the Nick will be pronouncing, who wants to write the PEP?
> >
> > ... and if Nick doesn't want to pronounce, I'm willing to offer to be
>
On 7 May 2016 at 08:21, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 6 May 2016 at 19:14, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> OK, assuming the Nick will be pronouncing, who wants to write the PEP?
>
> ... and if Nick doesn't want to pronounce, I'm willing to offer to be
> BDFL for this one. But a PEP is the first thing. (And IMO t
On 8 May 2016 at 09:23, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2016, 12:16 Chris Barker wrote:
>> how is this about "bootstrapping" -- to me, bootstrapping is when you need
>> X to build X. Isn't this just regular old configuration: you need x,y to
>> build z?
>
> Sure, if you don't like the term "
On Sat, May 7, 2016, 12:16 Chris Barker wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> What fields there will be and their semantics ...
>>
>>1. Format version (so just deciding on a name -- which also includes
>> whether it should be top-level or in a subsection --
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> What fields there will be and their semantics ...
>
>1. Format version (so just deciding on a name -- which also includes
> whether it should be top-level or in a subsection -- and initial value)
> 2. The actual bootstrap fiel
On Fri, 6 May 2016 at 16:58 Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 6 May 2016 at 09:40 Donald Stufft wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >>
> >> So who is the BDFL on this decision? It seems we need
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 6 May 2016 at 09:40 Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>>
>> On May 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> So who is the BDFL on this decision? It seems we need someone to stop the
>> bikeshedding on the field name and what file is
On 6 May 2016 at 19:14, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2016 at 09:40 Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>>
>> On May 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> So who is the BDFL on this decision? It seems we need someone to stop the
>> bikeshedding on the field name and what file is going to hou
On Fri, 6 May 2016 at 09:40 Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On May 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> So who is the BDFL on this decision? It seems we need someone to stop the
> bikeshedding on the field name and what file is going to house this
> configuration data. And do we need someone t
> On May 6, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> So who is the BDFL on this decision? It seems we need someone to stop the
> bikeshedding on the field name and what file is going to house this
> configuration data. And do we need someone to write a PEP for this proposal
> to have someth
The emails seem to have reached an equilibrium point of bikeshedding on the
(bootstrap|setup)_requires issue that is being discussed (as Daniel points
out below, this has nothing to do with how building works and instead is
only about statically declaring what tools need to be installed to simply
r
12 matches
Mail list logo
