On 07/04/2016 12:19 AM, Steve Dower wrote:
> My thinking on this issue was that some/most packages from the stdlib
> would move into site-packages. Certainly I'd expect asyncio to be in
> this category, and probably typing. Even going as far as email and
> urllib would potentially be beneficial (to
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> If packages had a way to opt-out of needing the whole standard library,
> and instead specify the stdlib subset they need, answering questions
> like "will this run on my phone?" and "what piece of the stdlib do we
> want to port next?" would
On 07/05/2016 10:05 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>> If packages had a way to opt-out of needing the whole standard library,
>> and instead specify the stdlib subset they need, answering questions
>> like "will this run on my phone?" and "what pie
Hi,
asyncio is a good example because it wants to evolve faster than the
whole "CPython package". Each minor version of CPython adds news
features in asyncio. It is not always easy to document these changes.
Moreover, the behaviour of some functions also changed in minor
versions.
asyncio doesn't
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 09:53:24AM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> While we're on the subject, I'd like to offer another point for
> consideration: not all implementations of Python can provide the full
> stdlib, and not everyone wants the full stdlib.
>
> For MicroPython, most of Python's batterie
On 5 July 2016 at 18:02, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Yes, we're all probably sick and tired of hearing all the Chicken Little
> scare stories about how the GIL is killing Python, how everyone is
> abandoning Python for Ruby/Javascript/Go/Swift, how Python 3 is killing
> Python, etc. But sometimes the
On 05Jul2016 1021, Paul Moore wrote:
On 5 July 2016 at 18:02, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Yes, we're all probably sick and tired of hearing all the Chicken Little
scare stories about how the GIL is killing Python, how everyone is
abandoning Python for Ruby/Javascript/Go/Swift, how Python 3 is killin
On Jul 05, 2016, at 11:19 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>pip supports a requirements.txt file which is a nice may to declare
>dependency. You can:
>
>* specify the minimum library version
>* make some library specific to some operation systems
>* skip dependencies on some Python versions -- very helpf
(sorry if you get this twice, I dropped python-dev by mistake)
On 07/05/2016 07:02 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 09:53:24AM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
>> While we're on the subject, I'd like to offer another point for
>> consideration: not all implementations of Python c
On 5 July 2016 at 19:01, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> There are people who want to cut out what they don't need – to build
> self-contained applications (pyinstaller, Python for Android), or to
> eliminate unnecessary dependencies (python3-tkinter). And they will do
> it with CPython's blessing or witho
On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 at 13:02 Paul Moore wrote:
> On 5 July 2016 at 19:01, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> > There are people who want to cut out what they don't need – to build
> > self-contained applications (pyinstaller, Python for Android), or to
> > eliminate unnecessary dependencies (python3-tkinter)
On 05Jul2016 1404, Brett Cannon wrote:
Realizing that all of these are just proposals with no solid plan behind
them, they are all predicated on moving to GitHub, and none of these are
directly promoting releasing every module in the stdlib on PyPI as a
stand-alone package with its own versioning
On 6 July 2016 at 07:04, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Realizing that all of these are just proposals with no solid plan behind
> them, they are all predicated on moving to GitHub, and none of these are
> directly promoting releasing every module in the stdlib on PyPI as a
> stand-alone package with its o
On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 at 18:16 Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 6 July 2016 at 07:04, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > Realizing that all of these are just proposals with no solid plan behind
> > them, they are all predicated on moving to GitHub, and none of these are
> > directly promoting releasing every module i
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 08:01:43PM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> In the tkinter case, compiling for source is easy on a developer's
> computer, but doing that on a headless server brings in devel files for
> the entire graphical environment.
> Are you saying Python on servers should have a way to
On 07/06/2016 05:11 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 08:01:43PM +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
>> In the tkinter case, compiling for source is easy on a developer's
>> computer, but doing that on a headless server brings in devel files for
>> the entire graphical environment.
>>
On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Maybe a good short-term solution would be to make "import tkinter" raise
> ImportError("Run `dnf install tkinter` to install the tkinter module")
> if not found. This would prevent confusion while keeping the status quo.
> I'll look into that.
On 6 July 2016 at 10:01, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> 4) Adjust pip to ignore installed stdlib modules that are present, so
> distributions can depend on "statistics" and not "statistics if
> python_ver<3.4". (statistics is just an example, obviously this would
> only work for modules added after the PE
d most people have pinned
versions, that goes away.
Top-posted from my Windows Phone
-Original Message-
From: "Paul Moore"
Sent: 7/6/2016 2:32
To: "Petr Viktorin"
Cc: "Python-Dev"
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Breaking up the stdlib (Was: release cadence)
On
On 6 July 2016 at 14:55, Steve Dower wrote:
> I think the wsgiref issue was that it wasn't in site-packages and so
> couldn't be removed or upgraded. Having the dist-info available and putting
> them in site-packages (or a new directory?) lets us handle
> querying/replacing/removing using the exis
om: "Paul Moore"
Sent: 7/6/2016 7:10
To: "Steve Dower"
Cc: "Petr Viktorin" ; "Python-Dev"
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Breaking up the stdlib (Was: release cadence)
On 6 July 2016 at 14:55, Steve Dower wrote:
> I think the wsgiref issue was that it wasn&#
On 06Jul2016 0753, Steve Dower wrote:
Thrashing out details should go on the workflow SIG, and I guess I'm the
obvious candidate to push it asking. But given my own time constraints
right now, I'm not going to dive into details if the high level concept
(stdlib packages can be individually update
22 matches
Mail list logo
