Brett Cannon wrote:
I know AMK was experimenting with rest2web as a possible way to do the
web site. There has also been talk about trying out another system.
But I also know some people would rather put the effort into improving
Pyramid.
You forgot the ponies!
Once again, it's a
Anthony Baxter wrote:
The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local
work on a bunch of different files
the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a
bunch of different files to make a new release.
/F
For reference, here's my effbot.org release procedure:
1) upload the distribution files one by one, as soon as they're
available. all links and stuff will appear automatically
2) update the associated description text through the web, when
necessary, as an HTML fragment. click save to
Alexey Borzenkov wrote:
P.S. Although it's a bit stretching, one might also say that
implementing spawn*p* on windows is not actually a new feature, and
rather is a bugfix for misfeature. Why every other platform can
benefit from spawn*p* and only Windows can't? This just makes
os.spawn*p*
Anthony Baxter wrote:
For reference, here's my effbot.org release procedure:
1) upload the distribution files one by one, as soon as they're
available. all links and stuff will appear automatically
2) update the associated description text through the web, when
necessary, as an HTML
On Friday 13 October 2006 16:59, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
yeah, but *you* are doing it. if the server did that, Martin and
other trusted contributors could upload the files as soon as they're
available, instead of first transferring them to you, and then waiting
for you to find yet another
I've uploaded a new patch to Sourceforge in response to feedback:
* I purged all // comments and fixed all 80 characters added by my
patch, as per Neil Norwitz.
* I added a definition of max() for those who don't already have one,
as per [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It now compiles cleanly on Linux
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Of course, if everybody would always recompile all extension modules
for a new Python feature release, those flags weren't necessary.
a dynamic registration approach would be even better, with a single entry
point
used to register all methods
Nick Coghlan wrote:
would collapse to
static PyTypeObject NoddyType;
Wouldn't that have to be a pointer to allow the Python runtime complete
control of the structure size without recompiling the extension?:
static PyTypeObject *NoddyType;
yeah, that's a silly typo. or maybe
Antoine wrote:
The standard library is not about easeness of installation. It is
about having
a consistent fixed codebase to work with. I don't want to go
Perl/CPAN, where you have 3-4 alternatives to do thing A which will
never interoperate
with whatever you chose among the 3-4
I apologize, this had to go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
On 10/13/06, Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 13 October 2006 16:59, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
yeah, but *you* are doing it. if the server did that, Martin and
other trusted contributors could upload the files as soon as they're
available, instead of first transferring them to
On Friday 13 October 2006 20:35, Bob Ippolito wrote:
With most consumer connections it's a lot faster to download than to
upload. Perhaps it would save you a few minutes if the contributors
uploaded directly to the destination (or to some other fast server)
and you could download and sign it,
On 10/13/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
any reason you cannot just use the subprocess module instead, like
everyone else?
Oh! Wow! I just simply didn't know of its existance (I'm pretty much
new to python), and both distutils and SCons (I was looking inside
them because they are
Alexey Borzenkov wrote:
any reason you cannot just use the subprocess module instead, like
everyone else?
Oh! Wow! I just simply didn't know of its existance (I'm pretty much
new to python), and both distutils and SCons (I was looking inside
them because they are major build systems and
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
Anthony Baxter schrieb:
Mostly it is easy for me, with the one huge caveat. As far as I know, the
Mac
build is a single command to run for Ronald, and the Doc build similarly for
Fred. I don't know what Martin has to do for the Windows build.
Actually, for
On Friday, October 13, 2006, at 01:10PM, Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Friday 13 October 2006 20:35, Bob Ippolito wrote:
With most consumer connections it's a lot faster to download than to
upload. Perhaps it would save you a few minutes if the contributors
uploaded directly to
On Friday, October 13, 2006, at 12:36PM, Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be fair, (thanks to Ronald) the Mac build is entirely automated by
a script with the caveat that you should be a little careful about
what your environment looks like (e.g. don't install fink or macports,
or to
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Anthony Baxter wrote:
The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local
work on a bunch of different files
the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a
bunch of different files to make a new release.
Indeed. I
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
I know AMK was experimenting with rest2web as a possible way to do the
web site. There has also been talk about trying out another system.
But I also know some people would rather put the effort into improving
Pyramid.
You forgot the ponies!
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not sure whether you are requesting these for yourself or for
somebody else. If for somebody else, that somebody else should seriously
consider building Python himself, and publishing the result.
I'm requesting it for the many Boost.Python (heck,
Alexey Borzenkov wrote:
Oh! Wow! I just simply didn't know of its existance (I'm pretty much
new to python), and both distutils and SCons (I was looking inside
them because they are major build systems and surely had to execute
compilers somehow), and upon seeing that each of them invented
I have patched Lib/modulefinder.py to work with absolute and relative imports.
It also is faster now, and has basic unittests in Lib/test/test_modulefinder.py.
The work was done in a theller_modulefinder SVN branch.
If nobody objects, I will merge this into trunk, and possibly also into
Larry Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
The machine is dual-core, and was quiescent at the time. XP's scheduler
is hopefully good enough to just leave the process running on one core.
It's not. Go into the task manager (accessable via Ctrl+Alt+Del by
default) and change the process'
I just got around to reading the messages.When I first saw this, I thought this is so that the processes that need to share and work on shared objects. That is where the locks are required. However, all shread objects are managed by the object manager and thus all such operations are in effect
David Abrahams schrieb:
I'm not sure whether you are requesting these for yourself or for
somebody else. If for somebody else, that somebody else should seriously
consider building Python himself, and publishing the result.
I'm requesting it for the many Boost.Python (heck, all Python 'C'
Steve Holden schrieb:
The other thing to watch out for is that I (or whoever) can still do local
work on a bunch of different files
the point of my previous post is that you *shouldn't* have to edit a
bunch of different files to make a new release.
Indeed. I seem to remember suggesting a
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Heller schrieb:
Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer, and I do
not
have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise
Installer.
Ok. So we are technically incapable of producing the
[Thomas Heller]
Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer,
and I do not
have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise
Installer.
[Martin v. Löwis]
Ok. So we are technically incapable of producing the Windows binaries of
another 2.3.x
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams schrieb:
I'm not sure whether you are requesting these for yourself or for
somebody else. If for somebody else, that somebody else should seriously
consider building Python himself, and publishing the result.
I'm requesting it for
Tim Peters schrieb:
FYI, I still have the Wise Installer. But since my understanding is
that the Unicode buffer overrun thingie is a non-issue on Windows,
I've got no interest in wrestling with a 2.3.6 for Windows.
In 2.3.6, there wouldn't just be that change, but also a few other
changes
31 matches
Mail list logo
