Re: [python-committers] Github reviews are cannibalizing BPO

2017-05-04 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 5 May 2017 at 10:58, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 05:44:46PM +, Brett Cannon wrote: > >> (And just so I can claim I stated this publicly at some point; our Roundup >> installation I think runs on Python 2.6 and Roundup itself has not been >> ported

Re: [python-committers] Github reviews are cannibalizing BPO

2017-05-04 Thread Barry Warsaw
On May 05, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >On the other hand... I can imagine some developers thinking "I just >spent all this time porting my library to Python 3 for free, if I had >known I would have waited". Except, think of the costs in mental anguish staying on Python 2. :)

Re: [python-committers] Github reviews are cannibalizing BPO

2017-05-04 Thread R. David Murray
On Thu, 04 May 2017 17:44:46 -, Brett Cannon wrote: > (And just so I can claim I stated this publicly at some point; our Roundup > installation I think runs on Python 2.6 and Roundup itself has not been > ported to Python 3, so I don't know what we want to do if Roundup

Re: [python-committers] Github reviews are cannibalizing BPO

2017-05-04 Thread Steven D'Aprano
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 05:44:46PM +, Brett Cannon wrote: > (And just so I can claim I stated this publicly at some point; our Roundup > installation I think runs on Python 2.6 and Roundup itself has not been > ported to Python 3, so I don't know what we want to do if Roundup doesn't > make

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Victor Stinner
2017-05-04 23:56 GMT+02:00 Brett Cannon : > Thanks, Victor! Well, I was also responsible of the breakage :-) But maybe it wasn't a good idea in the first place to use AST_H_DIR in distutils/sysconfig.py to get the "Include" string? ;-) Or maybe I missed a feature: is it

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Brett Cannon
Thanks, Victor! On Thu, 4 May 2017 at 14:32 Victor Stinner wrote: > 2017-05-04 22:51 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > > It seems like a real bug and a regression, I opened an issue to track it: > > http://bugs.python.org/issue30273 > > Ok, it

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Victor Stinner
2017-05-04 22:51 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > It seems like a real bug and a regression, I opened an issue to track it: > http://bugs.python.org/issue30273 Ok, it should be fixed by my commit:

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Victor Stinner
It seems like a real bug and a regression, I opened an issue to track it: http://bugs.python.org/issue30273 Victor 2017-05-04 16:44 GMT+02:00 Antoine Pitrou : > > Hello, > > I'm getting the following error on the Travis-CI coverage job: > (from

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Brett Cannon
Nevermind, I found a more recent failure, e.g. https://travis-ci.org/python/cpython/jobs/228773144 (I was looking at a 3.6 build). Whatever the cause it seems to be limited to master and the first failure is https://travis-ci.org/python/cpython/jobs/228409786 which corresponds to Victor's

Re: [python-committers] Coverage build broken?

2017-05-04 Thread Brett Cannon
I newer didn't have that issue (it failed for testing reasons): https://travis-ci.org/python/cpython/jobs/228820650. I tried to re-run the build step to see if I could reproduce but the PR is already merged so I can't check. But I'm a little surprised it tried to build the sdist since coverage.py

Re: [python-committers] Proposal for procedures regarding CoC actions

2017-05-04 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 4 May 2017 at 06:10, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Two ex-board members disagree. I have to side with Brian; the PSF board > should have minimal say in how the developers develop. > > Note, I'm fine with the board being the arbiter when someone disagrees with > their ban though