On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Someone with web server access may want to double check the
modification dates of the .txt files relative to the generated .html
files for other
On 9/26/2010 9:38 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 11:15 AM 9/27/2010 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
You misunderstand me; I wasn't asking how to *add* a link, but how to
turn OFF the automatic conversion of the phrase PEP 333 that happens
without any special markup.
Currently, the PEP preface is
At 01:22 PM 9/27/2010 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:38 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 11:15 AM 9/27/2010 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
You misunderstand me; I wasn't asking how to *add* a link, but how to
turn OFF the automatic conversion of the phrase PEP 333 that happens
without any special
The PEP still hasn't showed up on Python.org, though, so I'm wondering
if maybe I broke something else somewhere.
See http://www.python.org/status/postcommitlog.txt
Error processing PEP None (./pep-.txt), excluding: (./pep-.txt):
did not deal with u'Replaces' before having to handle
On 9/27/2010 2:22 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
The PEP still hasn't showed up on Python.org, though, so I'm wondering
if maybe I broke something else somewhere.
See http://www.python.org/status/postcommitlog.txt
Nasty link. That log begins back in 2008 and is so huge that it was
still loading
On 27/09/2010 18:22, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 9/26/2010 9:38 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 11:15 AM 9/27/2010 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
You misunderstand me; I wasn't asking how to *add* a link, but how to
turn OFF the automatic conversion of the phrase PEP 333 that happens
without any special markup.
All fixed.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 11:22, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
The PEP still hasn't showed up on Python.org, though, so I'm wondering
if maybe I broke something else somewhere.
See http://www.python.org/status/postcommitlog.txt
Error processing PEP None
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I checked in fixed PEP sources several hours
ago, but python.org still doesn't show PEP , or the updated
version of PEP 333.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
I spoke too soon. The Makefile stopped complaining before I committed,
but turned out that was a lie. Fixed PEP 0 again, verifying there were
no errors after a `make clean`, touching pep-.txt, or from just
deleting pep-.txt.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 13:33, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com
Am 27.09.2010 22:33, schrieb P.J. Eby:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I checked in fixed PEP sources several hours
ago, but python.org still doesn't show PEP , or the updated
version of PEP 333.
It does now, for me, so I assume
Am 27.09.2010 22:17, schrieb P.J. Eby:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope.
Indeed. The immediate problem was that genpepindex tried to read
pep-, and didn't like it.
I worked around that in r85041, so that genpepindex now skips over
pep-.txt. However,
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:33 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I checked in fixed PEP sources several hours ago, but
python.org still doesn't show PEP , or the updated version of PEP 333.
I tweaked
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I checked in fixed PEP sources several hours ago, but
python.org still doesn't show PEP , or the updated version of PEP 333.
Seems
Someone with web server access may want to double check the
modification dates of the .txt files relative to the generated .html
files for other PEPs though.
make will deal with that just fine. If a PEP was modified, svn up will
update the time stamp on the file. When then the rebuild fails,
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Someone with web server access may want to double check the
modification dates of the .txt files relative to the generated .html
files for other PEPs though.
make will deal with that just fine. If a PEP was modified,
At 02:03 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I checked in fixed PEP sources several hours ago, but
python.org still doesn't show
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:29 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 02:03 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
All fixed.
Nope. I mean, sure, I
On 9/26/2010 9:38 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
Currently, the PEP preface is littered with unnecessary links,
because the PEP pre-processor turns *every* mere textual mention of a
PEP into a link to it.
Perhaps the preprocessor should only do this for the first
occurrence of each linkable phrase
At 05:41 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:29 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 02:03 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 12:36 PM 9/27/2010 -0700, Brett Cannon
Because it's not clear to most of us on this thread what the failure
modes and recovery strategies are? I know it's clear as mud to me how
to debug these kinds of issues.
As a starting point, look at the postcommitlog. It should contain the
commands that got executed, and the error messages
Well, one of the tradeoffs here is that Informational track allows
something to grow into a solid standard without also having to pass the
same level of up-front scrutiny and commitment that a Standards track
item does. I rather doubt that either the DBAPI *or* WSGI would've
passed that
At 08:20 AM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'm happy approving Final status for the
*original* PEP 333 and I'm happy to approve a new PEP which includes
PJE's corrections.
Can we make it PEP , then? ;-)
That number would at least communicate that it's the same thing, but
for
On 9/26/2010 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
Thank you do doing the needed rewrite.
Can we make it PEP , then? ;-)
That number would at least communicate that it's the same thing, but for
Python 3.
A new rewriten PEP gives you a bit more freedom than doing it in place.
It will be easier to
On Sep 26, 2010, at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 08:20 AM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'm happy approving Final status for the
*original* PEP 333 and I'm happy to approve a new PEP which includes
PJE's corrections.
Can we make it PEP , then? ;-)
That works for me.
-Barry
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 26, 2010, at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 08:20 AM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'm happy approving Final status for the
*original* PEP 333 and I'm happy to approve a new PEP which includes
PJE's
At 01:44 PM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 26, 2010, at 1:33 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 08:20 AM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'm happy approving Final status for the
*original* PEP 333 and I'm
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Since you have commit privileges, just do it. The PEP editor position
mostly exists to assure non-committers are not prevented from
authoring PEPs.
Please do add a prominent note at the top of PEP 333 pointing to PEP
Done. The other amendments were never actually made, so I just
reverted the Python 3 bit after moving it to the new PEP. I'll make
the changes to instead as soon as I have another time slot free.
At 01:56 PM 9/26/2010 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Since you have commit privileges,
At 02:59 PM 9/26/2010 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
You could mark added material is a way that does not conflict with
rst or html. Or use .rst to make new text stand out in the .html web
verion (bold, underlined, red, or whatever). People familiar with
333 can focus on the marked sections. New
At 11:15 AM 9/27/2010 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
P.J. Eby http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devpje
at telecommunity.com writes:
(For that matter, if anybody knows how to make it not turn *every* PEP
reference into a link, that'd be good too! It doesn't really need to
turn 5 or 6
P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com writes:
At 11:15 AM 9/27/2010 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
reST, being designed explicitly for Python documentation, has support
for PEP references built in:
You misunderstand me; I wasn't asking how to *add* a link, but how to
turn OFF the automatic conversion
31 matches
Mail list logo
