Re: [Python-Dev] PEP487: Simpler customization of class creation

FWIW I copied the version you posted into the peps repo already, since it provides a significant update to the last version there. On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I'm reviewing this now. > > Martin, can you please submit the new version of your PEP as a Pull > Request t

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP487: Simpler customization of class creation

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Martin Teichmann wrote: > Hi list, > > another round for PEP 487, is there any chance it still makes it into > Python 3.6? Sure, feature freeze isn't until September (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0494/). > The PEP should be effectively done, I updated the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP487: Simpler customization of class creation

I'm reviewing this now. Martin, can you please submit the new version of your PEP as a Pull Request to the new peps repo on GitHub? https://github.com/python/peps --Guido On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 14 July 2016 at 00:15, Martin Teichmann wrote: >> Hi list, >> >>

Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI index deprecation

Hi Donald, thanks for your immediate response! Let's move the discussion to the distutils-sig. Best regards, Dmitry On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > Dmitry Trofimov jetbrains.com> writes: > > > > > We will be very happy if the functionality of the index is restored at >

Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI index deprecation

Dmitry Trofimov jetbrains.com> writes: > > We will be very happy if the functionality of the index is restored at least > for some short period of time: please, give as a couple of weeks. That will > allow us to implement a workaround and provide the fix for the several latest > major versions o

Re: [Python-Dev] PyPI index deprecation

You may know that there are approximately 3 pypi maintainers, all overworked and one paid. It is amazing that it works at all. I don't know anything about that particular decision though. On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:21 PM Dmitry Trofimov < dmitry.trofi...@jetbrains.com> wrote: > Hi, > > as you prob

[Python-Dev] PyPI index deprecation

Hi, as you probably already know, today the PyPI index page ( https://pypi.python.org/pypi?%3Aaction=index) was deprecated and ceased to be. Among other things it affected PyCharm IDE that relied on that page to enable packaging related features from the IDE. As a result users of PyCharm can no l

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP487: Simpler customization of class creation

On 14 July 2016 at 00:15, Martin Teichmann wrote: > Hi list, > > another round for PEP 487, is there any chance it still makes it into > Python 3.6? > > The PEP should be effectively done, I updated the examples in it, > given that I implemented the PEP I could actually test the examples, > so now

Re: [Python-Dev] Status of Python 3.6 PEPs?

Hi, > "PEP 487 -- Simpler customisation of class creation" > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0487/ > => draft I would like to get that into Python 3.6. It's already implemented, including documentation and tests (http://bugs.python.org/issue27366). Greetings Martin _

[Python-Dev] PEP487: Simpler customization of class creation

Hi list, another round for PEP 487, is there any chance it still makes it into Python 3.6? The PEP should be effectively done, I updated the examples in it, given that I implemented the PEP I could actually test the examples, so now they work. The implementation is at http://bugs.python.org/issu

Re: [Python-Dev] __qualname__ exposed as a local variable: standard?

Hi list, > I noticed __qualname__ is exposed by locals() while defining a class. This > is handy but I'm not sure about its status: is it standard or just an > artifact of the current implementation? (btw, the pycodestyle linter -former > pep8- rejects its usage). I was unable to find any referenc