On 17/07/2010 22:57, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/17/2010 8:41 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
IIRC Terry Reedy is also interested in moving IDLE forward.
Interested, yes. But until either a) I can commit patches, or b) there
is someone who will respond to commit review recommendations with "No,
here is why not" or "Yes, committed", I will work on other issues, such
as doc issues, for which I can get responses.
I am certainly reluctant to recruit others to help, as I did for #9222,
if there will be no action indefinitely.
This is standard Python behavour. The worst case I've come across is a
patch that dated back to 2001 that had not been dealt with. But I'm
staggered as to how a third party supplies a patch for (say) 2.3, it
doesn't get applied, then the issue tracker simply keeps updating the
version targeted until we're now at 3.2. That of course doesn't mean
that anything will get done, better wait until py4.7?
My approach is very simple, maybe even ruthless, but in the long term I
believe it's better for everybody. Does this patch stay open, yes or
no? At least it gets the mind focused.
Some people have complained at me about my approach. Others have said
great job. Obviously there's no correct or incorrect way, there's nowt
as queer as folk.
Reminds me of Canned Heat, "Let's stick together".
Kindest regards.
Mark Lawrence.
_______________________________________________
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
