Trent Nelson schrieb:
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 08:00:46PM +0100, Thomas Heller wrote:
Since I do not have a machine with so much memory: Does one
of the buildbots allow to run tests for this feature, or
do I have to wait for the snakebite farm?
Will you be at PyCon? The wait might not
Sorry, I mistakenly said without issue and then copied the issues
below. I meant to say not without issues. _multiprocessing does *not*
build on Solaris 8.
Hmm. They are all warnings - did you omit the actual error message?
The lack of CMSG_LEN seems to suggest that control messages are not
2) IDLE does much better but its support seems to still be imcomplete.
Upgrade tk/tkinter/IDLE (wherever the problems lie) and make IDLE's
shell an alternate UI.
That is certainly *no* good SoC project. Instead, just report it as
a *specific* bug report (rather than saying it seems
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Sorry, I mistakenly said without issue and then copied the issues
below. I meant to say not without issues. _multiprocessing does *not*
build on Solaris 8.
Hmm. They are all warnings - did you omit the actual error message?
The lack of CMSG_LEN seems to suggest that
C. Titus Brown wrote:
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 07:30:01PM -0300, Daniel (ajax) Diniz wrote:
I do think you should be prepared for pushback from python-dev on any
such ideas ;). Don't get too ambitious about writing up *your* way of
fixing things, but rather make sure you and the students are
Brett Cannon wrote:
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the python.org
http://python.org: http://www.python.org/dev/workflow/ . So now people
who ever triage issues have a guide to follow if they are not sure how
to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 23, 2009, at 8:31 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the python.org
http://python.org:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Given that the out-of-the-box Python install already has facilities for
retrieving text over the net and executing that text, the notion of
locking down a machine to include only the bits installed in the stock
Python install is just security theatre; such a machine shouldn't
Lie Ryan wrote:
Some companies have /very/ strict policies on running anything on live
server, including scripts you write yourself. The problem is if the
script goes awry, it might disturb the stability or even security of the
server.
Yes, we as a profession right software and have
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Network connectivity isn't a given, even today.
Indeed, now that is an important consideration.
Packaging systems need to support offline modes. Buildout already does...
If someone else decides to create a MinimalPython which consists solely
of something like easy_install
Paul Moore wrote:
I am not. What I *am* doing is saying (obliquely, I admit) is that for
a package management system to be decent enough for stripping down
the stdlib to not be an issue, it has to address these points (which
clearly it can't).
Sure it can, either by supporting offline bundles
R. David Murray wrote:
I disagree. One of the jobs I've had is release management for
internal software projects that depend on various external pieces.
Release integration tested against specific versions of those external
packages, and those were the packages that needed to wind up on the
Chris Withers wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Network connectivity isn't a given, even today.
Indeed, now that is an important consideration.
Packaging systems need to support offline modes. Buildout already does...
If someone else decides to create a MinimalPython which consists solely
of
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
In some environments, each new component must be approved. Once
python is approved, the standard library is OK, but adding 7 packages
from pypi requires 7 more sets of approvals.
True, but as I mentioend elsewhere, I myself haven't done a python
project where I only
Trent Mick wrote:
Apologies for jumping in mid-thread here. FYI: We're (where we ==
ActiveState here) looking at spending more effort on Python of late.
Some of our thoughts are on add modules: whether added to the
ActivePython core or easily addable via an equivalent to ActivePerl's
ppm
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I think multiprocessing is misguided in hard-coding these settings
into setup.py. As we can see, the necessary features are available
on some versions of Solaris, but not on others. It would be better
if autoconf tests were written, and the entire configuration removed
Steve Holden wrote:
Some people want an all batteries and kitchen sink included distro
that they can treat as a single component for configuration control
purposes. Others, like you, want the libraries to be separated out to
allow separate fixes.
Yes, but while the batteries included option
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I think multiprocessing is misguided in hard-coding these settings
into setup.py. As we can see, the necessary features are available
on some versions of Solaris, but not on others. It would be
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 10:26:54PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
- C. Titus Brown wrote:
- On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 07:30:01PM -0300, Daniel (ajax) Diniz wrote:
- I do think you should be prepared for pushback from python-dev on any
- such ideas ;). Don't get too ambitious about writing up *your*
Oh, I heartily endorse his suggestions! I just want to make sure that we
make maximum use of students (and their code doesn't get tossed at the
end of the summer, which has serious morale consequences ;)
This is my concern as well.
One of my past students pitched a core project and ended up
Jesse Noller wrote:
Christian - I would appreciate it if we could coordinate/track this on
the tracker too - I had no idea you were doing this in the back port,
and I don't think we want the two code bases to diverge that much.
You could not have known about the idea because I started the
2009/3/23 Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk:
Paul Moore wrote:
I am not. What I *am* doing is saying (obliquely, I admit) is that for
a package management system to be decent enough for stripping down
the stdlib to not be an issue, it has to address these points (which
clearly it can't).
In Python 2.5, list objects were special-cased to skip PyObject_GetItem and
go straight to PyList_GET_ITEM. That special case gave made other sequences
20% slower than lists for getitem operations. The special case was removed
in Python 3 (haven't checked 2.6).
Today I was tracing through how
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk writes:
Well, python already has tools available to do exactly this.:
buildout from a private egg repository will do exactly what you're after.
However, its built on top of setuptools, which is flawed, and it's not
blessed as official core python,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots of attention -- more than any one experienced person is
likely to have
I'm willing to step up as a student for this but I still have to write
a good proposal for it.
My actual concern is about mentor
Glenn Linderman wrote:
One can set CMD into Unicode mode (chcp 65001)... not sure how Python
reacts to that either. But even then...
I tried that and others have reported doing so on python-list but no one
has gotten that to work.
CMD will only use fixed-width fonts, and none of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Chris Withers chris at simplistix.co.uk writes:
Well, python already has tools available to do exactly this.:
buildout from a private egg repository will do exactly what you're after.
However, its built on top of setuptools,
C. Titus Brown wrote:
Given the relative paucity of core Python GSoC ideas, I think you should
go for both of these, *especially* if you have a mentor up front. So,
write 'em up, add 'em to the GSoC page, and let's see who we get...
If we get good applications for both, then I think we can
Daniel (ajax) Diniz ajaksu at gmail.com writes:
Sometimes, non-obvious bits like the right sequence of svnmerge
commands, the right way to link a Rietveld code review to a given
issue or checking for correct autoconf version might get in the way of
real development.
Well, really, rather
Thanks for the feedback, Antoine!
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Daniel (ajax) Diniz ajaksu at gmail.com writes:
Sometimes, non-obvious bits like the right sequence of svnmerge
commands, the right way to link a Rietveld code review to a given
issue or checking for correct autoconf version might get
Hi,
Daniel (ajax) Diniz ajaksu at gmail.com writes:
But the real point is that, regardless of underlying VCS, there is a
choice between having all core developers know by heart the right
switches and order of steps to correctly checkout/update -( branch
locally) - fix - diff - commit -
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Hi,
Daniel (ajax) Diniz ajaksu at gmail.com writes:
But the real point is that, regardless of underlying VCS, there is a
choice between having all core developers know by heart the right
switches and order of steps
Guilherme Polo ggpolo at gmail.com writes:
Any chance you were not using the latest svnmerge when you did that
merge ? I've had problems like this when using older versions.
Well, actually, Benjamin did the merge, so perhaps he can give more info.
Regards
Antoine.
2009/3/23 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net:
Guilherme Polo ggpolo at gmail.com writes:
Any chance you were not using the latest svnmerge when you did that
merge ? I've had problems like this when using older versions.
Well, actually, Benjamin did the merge, so perhaps he can give more
Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots of attention -- more than any one experienced person is
likely to have
I'm willing to step up as a student for this but I still have to write
a good proposal for it.
My actual concern
On Tue, Mar 3 at 19:25:21 Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 05:13, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 at 06:01, Ivan Krsti?~G wrote:
On Mar 2, 2009, at 7:08 PM, Steve Holden
In some environments, each new component must be approved. Once
python is approved, the standard library is OK, but adding 7 packages
from pypi requires 7 more sets of approvals.
True, but as I mentioend elsewhere, I myself haven't done a python
project where I only needed python and the
Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
1) Assume the index is a PyLong until proven otherwise
The PyIndex_Check in PyObject_GetItem looks pretty useless. If it
returns false, PyObject_GetItem throws a type error. If we skipped the
PyIndex_Check when it would have returned false, PyNumber_AsSsize_t
would
I've started with a autoconf file for the multiprocessing backport
package. The tests should produce the same set of definitions but I'm
not able to test it on different platforms expect Linux.
http://python-multiprocessing.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/configure.ac
If you want to see how it fares
On approximately 3/23/2009 12:12 PM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Terry Reedy:
Glenn Linderman wrote:
One can set CMD into Unicode mode (chcp 65001)... not sure how Python
reacts to that either. But even then...
I tried that and others have reported doing so on
Everything I've seen from Daniel so far seems to be about either making
things we already do more efficient, or else providing additional
features in ways that don't make the tools any more confusing for others
already used to a particular way of doing things. So he seems to be
navigating
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
In some environments, each new component must be approved. Once
python is approved, the standard library is OK, but adding 7 packages
from pypi requires 7 more sets of approvals.
True, but as I mentioend elsewhere, I myself haven't done a python
project where I only
The real issues with svnmerge are its occasional bugs or failures (it forgot
some changesets when merging in the io-c branch!), its slowness, and its
limitations (which are really inherent to the SVN model: e.g., if someone
commits to the branch you have just started doing an svnmerge to, you
I was always able to get what I need through aptitude.
Yes, well known for its ability to run on Windows and Mac OS...
Is it? I had never heard before that aptitude works well on
Windows (although it does work on OSX).
I'm actually not quite sure if that was a sarcastic response to Chris's
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
P.P.S. Are you sure you have to re-merge when somebody commits
something unrelated to the branch? Or just when somebody else merges
as well?
The latter is the only one I've ever had problems with (and that was due
to me forgetting to update before merging rather than
Martin v. Löwis martin at v.loewis.de writes:
P.S. I don't believe your claim that it forgot changesets. Could it be
that it simply forgot adding files, and that it did so because you
already had the files in the sandbox, so that the merging failed?
It's more weird actually, it actively
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots of attention -- more than any one experienced person is
likely to have
I'm willing to step up as a student for
P.S. I don't believe your claim that it forgot changesets. Could it be
that it simply forgot adding files, and that it did so because you
already had the files in the sandbox, so that the merging failed?
It's more weird actually, it actively forgot some changes in some files but
some
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
In some environments, each new component must be approved. Once
python is approved, the standard library is OK, but adding 7 packages
from pypi requires 7 more sets of approvals.
True, but as I mentioend elsewhere, I myself haven't done a python
project where I only
Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots of attention -- more than any one experienced person is
likely to have
I'm willing to step up as a student for this but I still have to write
a good proposal for it.
My actual concern is
Nick Coghlan wrote:
The main problem is that many of these methods are not only used
internally, but are *also* part of the public C API made available to
extension modules. We want misuse of the latter to trigger exceptions,
not segfault the interpreter.
But is it worth slowing everything
I don't disagree, I just don't want to volunteer projects for something
they don't want.
Right, there must be clear indication that they are willing to accept
the work when it's done.
Note also that some of the largest Python-based projects, Django,
I have a working port of Django to Py3k,
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but I didn't mean to say that this
version should work on both python 2.x and python 3.x. Ideally, there
would be a PIL distribution for 2.x only and another one for 3.x only.
I don't know what Fredrik thinks, but I would not consider this ideal.
Ideally, there
2009/3/22 Tennessee Leeuwenburg tleeuwenb...@gmail.com
Hi Daniel,
That would be great. It occurs to me that if we wanted to use Stage
settings, it would be easy to search for issues which are not closed by
literally searching for 'not closed' rather than 'open'. I think it's also
unclear
That would be great. It occurs to me that if we wanted to use
Stage settings, it would be easy to search for issues which are
not closed by literally searching for 'not closed' rather than
'open'. I think it's also unclear whether the 'pending' stage means
'suspended
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the
python.org http://python.org
http://python.org: http://www.python.org/dev/workflow/ .
So now people
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 17:01, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did
a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the
python.org http://python.org
http://python.org:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 05:36, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 23, 2009, at 8:31 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed
Daniel (ajax) Diniz wrote:
Hi,
I'm about to submit a proposal for the PSF to use one GSoC slot for
the Python bug tracker. I've collected a few items I think might be
interesting for Roundup itself, most of which are valid RFEs for our
tracker. Feel free to add more ideas to the list below.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.dewrote:
That would be great. It occurs to me that if we wanted to use
Stage settings, it would be easy to search for issues which are
not closed by literally searching for 'not closed' rather than
'open'. I
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
already the introduction of eggs made the life worse for Debian
package maintainers, at least initially - i.e. for a few years.
It still is, FWIW,
David
___
Python-Dev mailing
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 at 16:20, Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
literally searching for 'not closed' rather than 'open'. I think it's also
unclear whether the 'pending' stage means 'suspended pending additional user
feedback' or 'resolution of this issue is impending'. My understanding was
that it
This is all over now, but I do think that the change from char to int
was made for alignment reasons. I don't know, but I could certainly
imagine that aligned memcpy calls are faster. I can't explain why I
still put the 3-byte savings comment in SVN -- perhaps I was in a
hurry.
On Sun, Mar 22,
Chris Withers writes:
aptitude also won't help when:
- your customer is deploying onto managed machines running RHEL
True.
- debian has an outdated and/or broken version of your package.
True, but just as for the package system you are advocating, it's
quite easy to set up your apt to
64 matches
Mail list logo
