On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
I think this social problem of the PEP can only be solved if the CPython
project stops doing the major share of the stdlib maintenance, thus freeing
its own developer capacities to focus on CPython related improvements
Nick Coghlan, 19.04.2011 10:57:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
I think this social problem of the PEP can only be solved if the CPython
project stops doing the major share of the stdlib maintenance, thus freeing
its own developer capacities to focus on CPython related
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:47:21 +0200
giampaolo.rodola python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/8c49f7fbba1d
changeset: 69437:8c49f7fbba1d
user:Giampaolo Rodola' g.rod...@gmail.com
date:Tue Apr 19 09:47:16 2011 +0200
summary:
os.sendfile(): on
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
[snip]
This PEP has received a lengthy discussion by now, so here's why I think
it's being fought so heavily by several CPython core developers,
specifically those who have traditionally carried a large part of the
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
I think this social problem of the PEP can only be solved if the CPython
project stops doing the major share of the stdlib maintenance, thus freeing
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
I think this social problem of the PEP can only be solved if the CPython
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
With Martin getting ready to release 2.5.6, I think it's time to prepare a
2.6.7 source-only security release.
I'll work my way through the NEWS file and recent commits, but if there is
anything that you know is missing
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
Nick Coghlan, 19.04.2011 10:57:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
I think this social problem of the PEP can only be solved if the CPython
project stops doing the major share of the stdlib
Once this move is made/accepted, I would expect the other
implementation to rapidly move away from their custom implementations
of the stdlib and contribute to the shared code base and
documentation. Yes, this places a burden on CPython, but in the long
term in benefits *all* of the projects
Hi,
I asked one year ago if we should drop OS/2 support: Andrew MacIntyre,
our OS/2 maintainer, answered:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099477.html
Extract: The 3.x branch needs quite a bit of work on OS/2 to
deal with Unicode, as OS/2 was one of the earlier OSes with
On Apr 19, 2011, at 03:25 PM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
With Martin getting ready to release 2.5.6, I think it's time to prepare a
2.6.7 source-only security release.
I'll work my way through the NEWS file and recent
In reviewing a fix for the metaclass calculation in __build_class__
[1], I realised that PEP 3115 poses a potential problem for the common
practice of using type(name, bases, ns) for dynamic class creation.
Specifically, if one of the base classes has a metaclass with a
significant __prepare__()
Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I asked one year ago if we should drop OS/2 support: Andrew MacIntyre,
our OS/2 maintainer, answered:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099477.html
Extract: The 3.x branch needs quite a bit of work on OS/2 to
deal with Unicode, as OS/2 was
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:06:09 +0200, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
That's what makes the PEP feel so unfair to CPython developers, because
they are the ones who carry most of the burden of maintaining the stdlib in
the first place, and who will most likely continue to carry it,
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:37:41 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:06:09 +0200, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
That's what makes the PEP feel so unfair to CPython developers, because
they are the ones who carry most of the burden of maintaining
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:01:44 +0200, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
A related question is: when other Python VM projects try to port a given C
module, would they actually invest the time to write a pure Python version
that may or may not run within acceptable performance bounds for
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:29:24 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Once this move is made/accepted, I would expect the other
implementation to rapidly move away from their custom implementations
of the stdlib and contribute to the shared code base and
documentation. Yes, this
Hi,
summary:
Fix a few hyphens in argparse.rst.
- :synopsis: Command-line option and argument parsing library.
+ :synopsis: Command-line option and argument-parsing library.
I believe that change should be reverted. “argument parsing library”
is
a noun determined (qualified) by
On Apr 19, 2011, at 10:36 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I asked one year ago if we should drop OS/2 support: Andrew MacIntyre,
our OS/2 maintainer, answered:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099477.html
Extract: The 3.x branch needs quite a
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Apr 19, 2011, at 10:36 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I asked one year ago if we should drop OS/2 support: Andrew MacIntyre,
our OS/2 maintainer, answered:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099477.html
Extract: The 3.x
Le mardi 19 avril 2011 à 15:20 -0400, Doug Hellmann a écrit :
The Python core team is not really representative of the Python
community users, so I think this needs a different approach:
Instead of simply deprecating OSes without notice to the general
Python community, how about doing a
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:20:13 -0400
Doug Hellmann doug.hellm...@gmail.com wrote:
Victor, if you want to post the call for support to Python Insider, let me
know off list and I will set you up with access.
Doesn't it have more chances of succeeding if posted to
comp.lang.python, simply?
Well, not remove directly, but plan to remove it using the PEP 11
procedure (mark OS/2 and VMS as unsupported, and remove the code in
Python 3.4).
I think the PEP 11 procedure is just right for this. It *is* a call
for maintainers, so if any user is interested in ongoing support,
they should
23 matches
Mail list logo
