On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 16:09 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: > It might be me, but I find it a bit odd that you didn't do anything with > this fix.
Hi Armin. Actually it was SF #900092 that I was referring to. We fixed this bug and those patches were applied to CVS (pre-svn conversion) for both 2.4.2 and 2.5a1. So at least the one I was talking about are already in there! > At this point I'm interpreting your mail as saying that you don't really > mind if hotshot is in the standard library or not, because you are using > your own fixed version anyway. Nobody is proposing to wipe out hotshot > from the face of the planet. Sorry if I sound offensive, but I'd rather > hear the opinion of people that care about the stdlib. I think you just misunderstood me. I definitely care about the stdlib and no, we strongly prefer not to use some locally hacked up Python. E.g. we were running 2.4.1 with this (and a few other patches) until 2.4.2 came out, but now we're pretty much using pristine Python 2.4.2. So I still think hotshot can stay in the stdlib for a few releases, unless it's totally incompatible with lsprof, and then it's worth discussing. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ 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
