On Sun, 2007-02-11 at 08:20 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> On 2/10/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:59 -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > > I'm +1 on that change, despite its backwards incompatibility. It
> > > doesn't require much brain power
On 2/10/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:59 -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> > I'm +1 on that change, despite its backwards incompatibility. It
> > doesn't require much brain power to add import statements to code, so
> > it wouldn't be a *huge* inconve
On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 23:59 -0600, Adrian Holovaty wrote:
> On 2/9/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My recommendation in there is that we stop screwing around with builtins
> > and just import the thing directly and alias it in each module. We are
> > trying to be too clever.
On 2/9/07, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My recommendation in there is that we stop screwing around with builtins
> and just import the thing directly and alias it in each module. We are
> trying to be too clever. I don't really like breaking Python's existing
> use of _ as we ar
Hey Russ,
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 12:09 +0800, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been working on the test system again, trying to get #3162 merged
> in. The ticket itself is no big drama, but it does expose a larger
> problem with the i18n system that is causing some drama. I18n isn't
Hi all,
I've been working on the test system again, trying to get #3162 merged
in. The ticket itself is no big drama, but it does expose a larger
problem with the i18n system that is causing some drama. I18n isn't
really my specialty, so I'd appreciate any assistance in sorting this
problem out.
