spoke too early on its done sorry On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Ryan Paullin <ryanpaul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thanks for the reply hastings ive been working on a loopback interface its > done > > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:00 AM, <python-dev-requ...@python.org> wrote: > >> Send Python-Dev mailing list submissions to >> python-dev@python.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> python-dev-requ...@python.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> python-dev-ow...@python.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of Python-Dev digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: GitHub mirror (Was: Bitbucket mirror?) (mar...@v.loewis.de) >> 2. Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] itertools.chunks(iterable, >> size, fill=None)) (anatoly techtonik) >> 3. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Mark Lawrence) >> 4. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Stefan Behnel) >> 5. Re: Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) (Paul Boddie) >> 6. EuroPython 2012 Language Summit is Canceled. (Larry Hastings) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:27:02 +0200 >> From: mar...@v.loewis.de >> To: python-dev@python.org >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] GitHub mirror (Was: Bitbucket mirror?) >> Message-ID: >> <20120705202702.horde.yh-rbqgzi1vp9dx2h7nj...@webmail.df.eu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes >> >> >> You won't get any changes in to CPython by creating pull requests. We >> >> use http://bugs.python.org/ for that, sorry. >> > >> > Question -- is there a reason to abide by this rule for docs? That is, >> if we >> > could get a sympathetic core dev to look at pull requests for docs as >> part of >> > a streamlined process, would it cause problems? >> >> How do you communicate a "pull request"? On bitbucket, there is a >> "pull request" >> UI resulting in a tracker item being generated (and an email being sent), >> but >> hg.python.org doesn't have a notion of pull requests. Of course, you >> could >> use any communication means (email, telephone call, carrier pigeon) to >> request >> a pull from a "sympathetic core dev". >> >> > (What I'm really asking is whether or the bugs.python.org process is >> > considered critical for potentially minor doc changes and additions.) >> >> The sympathetic core dev is mostly free to bypass any submission process >> initially; commits that bypass established procedures will likely be >> questioned >> only after the fact. >> >> In the specific case, I'd be worried to verify that the submitter has >> provided >> a contributor form. That's easy to do in the bug tracker, but difficult >> to do >> in an offline pull request. Of course, for a really minor doc change >> (e.g. typo >> fixes), no contrib form is necessary. >> >> Regards, >> Martin >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:41:29 +0300 >> From: anatoly techtonik <techto...@gmail.com> >> To: Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> >> Cc: python-id...@python.org, python-dev@python.org >> Subject: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) >> Message-ID: >> <CAPkN8x+A-OYWNLNKDH= >> 6gnqn+o_tb3lmnimhys9zkymwr1g...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> >> wrote: >> > anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36: >> >> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>> From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 , >> add >> >>> grouper: >> >>> >> >>> "This has been rejected before. >> >> >> >> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that >> >> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that >> >> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting. >> > >> > The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even >> spell >> > them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions >> > and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who know >> > what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark >> > "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of >> > arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to >> the >> > same result as it did before, often several times before. >> >> Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others >> time? If people don't enjoy repeating themselves over and over - there >> is a bloody wiki. What should happen to people to start extracting >> gems of knowledge from piles of dusty sheets called list "archives" >> for others to admire. >> >> No, it is easier to say "it was already discussed many times", "why >> don't you Google yourself", "so far you're only complaining", etc. If >> people can't find anything - why everybody thinks they are ignorant >> and lazy. Even if it so, why nobody thinks that maybe that bloody >> Xapian index is dead again for a bloody amount of moons nobody knows >> why and how many exactly? Why nobody thinks that lazy coders can also >> help with development? Maybe that laziness is the primary reason some >> major groups actually prefer Python to Java, C++ and other more >> interesting languages (such as PHP) when it comes to typing? Make it >> easy and the patches will follow. Answers like "this was discussed >> before" don't make it easy to understand, and leaving users rereading >> old 19xx archives that people don't reread themselves will likely make >> users bounce and never (NEVER!) come up with some proposal again. An >> "organic" way to keep traffic low. >> >> Miscommunication is a bad experience for users, bad experience for >> developers, everybody is annoyed and as a result such nice language as >> Python loses points on TIOBE (and convenient chunk() functions to >> munch-munch on the sequence data). >> >> Wheew. :-F >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:55:09 +0100 >> From: Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> >> To: python-dev@python.org >> Cc: python-id...@python.org >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) >> Message-ID: <jt4re5$3gs$1...@dough.gmane.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> On 05/07/2012 20:41, anatoly techtonik wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> >> wrote: >> >> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36: >> >>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>>> From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 , >> add >> >>>> grouper: >> >>>> >> >>>> "This has been rejected before. >> >>> >> >>> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that >> >>> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that >> >>> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting. >> >> >> >> The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even >> spell >> >> them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions >> >> and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who >> know >> >> what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark >> >> "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of >> >> arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to >> the >> >> same result as it did before, often several times before. >> > >> > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others >> > time? If people don't enjoy repeating themselves over and over - there >> > is a bloody wiki. What should happen to people to start extracting >> > gems of knowledge from piles of dusty sheets called list "archives" >> > for others to admire. >> > >> > No, it is easier to say "it was already discussed many times", "why >> > don't you Google yourself", "so far you're only complaining", etc. If >> > people can't find anything - why everybody thinks they are ignorant >> > and lazy. Even if it so, why nobody thinks that maybe that bloody >> > Xapian index is dead again for a bloody amount of moons nobody knows >> > why and how many exactly? Why nobody thinks that lazy coders can also >> > help with development? Maybe that laziness is the primary reason some >> > major groups actually prefer Python to Java, C++ and other more >> > interesting languages (such as PHP) when it comes to typing? Make it >> > easy and the patches will follow. Answers like "this was discussed >> > before" don't make it easy to understand, and leaving users rereading >> > old 19xx archives that people don't reread themselves will likely make >> > users bounce and never (NEVER!) come up with some proposal again. An >> > "organic" way to keep traffic low. >> > >> > Miscommunication is a bad experience for users, bad experience for >> > developers, everybody is annoyed and as a result such nice language as >> > Python loses points on TIOBE (and convenient chunk() functions to >> > munch-munch on the sequence data). >> > >> > Wheew. :-F >> > >> >> Can I safely assume that you are volunteering to do the work required? >> >> -- >> Cheers. >> >> Mark Lawrence. >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 21:58:52 +0200 >> From: Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> >> To: python-dev@python.org >> Cc: python-id...@python.org >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) >> Message-ID: <jt4rlt$45k$1...@dough.gmane.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 21:41: >> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote: >> >> anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 15:36: >> >>> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>>> From Raymond's first message on http://bugs.python.org/issue6021 , >> add >> >>>> grouper: >> >>>> >> >>>> "This has been rejected before. >> >>> >> >>> I quite often see such arguments and I can't stand to repeat that >> >>> these are not arguments. It is good to know, but when people use that >> >>> as a reason to close tickets - that's just disgusting. >> >> >> >> The *real* problem is that people keep bringing up topics (and even >> spell >> >> them out in the bug tracker) without searching for existing discussions >> >> and/or tickets first. That's why those who do such a search (or who >> know >> >> what they are talking about anyway) close these tickets with the remark >> >> "this has been rejected before", instead of repeating an entire heap of >> >> arguments all over again to feed a discussion that would only lead to >> the >> >> same result as it did before, often several times before. >> > >> > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others >> > time? >> >> Yes, that is exactly the question. >> >> It takes time to write things up nicely. I mean, once someone has pointed >> out to you that this has been discussed before, you could just go, look it >> up (or search for it), and then put it into a Wiki or blog post yourself, >> or sum it up and send it to the mailing list as a reply. Why rely on >> others >> to do it for you? >> >> Stefan >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 23:11:46 +0200 >> From: Paul Boddie <p...@boddie.org.uk> >> To: python-dev@python.org >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Bloody FAQ (Was: [Python-ideas] >> itertools.chunks(iterable, size, fill=None)) >> Message-ID: <201207052311.46867.p...@boddie.org.uk> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Stefan Behnel wrote: >> > anatoly techtonik, 05.07.2012 21:41: >> > > >> > > Make the bloody FAQ and summarize this stuff? Why waste each others >> > > time? >> > >> > Yes, that is exactly the question. >> > >> > It takes time to write things up nicely. I mean, once someone has >> pointed >> > out to you that this has been discussed before, you could just go, look >> it >> > up (or search for it), and then put it into a Wiki or blog post >> yourself, >> > or sum it up and send it to the mailing list as a reply. Why rely on >> others >> > to do it for you? >> >> To be fair, Anatoly has done quite a bit of maintenance on some of the >> Wiki >> content around various aspects of the project, so it's not as if he's >> demanding anything out of the ordinary or asking for others to do things >> that >> he isn't already doing in some sense. My experience is that there usually >> needs to be some willingness on the other end of the transaction, and if >> it >> takes repetition to encourage it amongst those who don't see the current >> situation as a problem for them, then so be it. >> >> Of course, this kind of documentation activity, where one gathers together >> historical decisions and the consensus from long-forgotten discussions, is >> pretty thankless work. I occasionally regard it as worthwhile if only to >> bring up something someone said as an inconvenient interruption in any >> current discussion, but that's a pretty minimal reward for all the effort >> unless one has such work as part of one's daily routine. >> >> Paul >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2012 08:47:30 +0200 >> From: Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org> >> To: python-dev@python.org, python-committ...@python.org >> Subject: [Python-Dev] EuroPython 2012 Language Summit is Canceled. >> Message-ID: <4ff68a02.8000...@hastings.org> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" >> >> >> >> I only got one more RSVP and zero topics for the docket. So let's >> sprint instead. >> >> See you at the PyCon 2013 Language Summit, >> >> >> //arry/ >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: < >> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120706/f13295aa/attachment-0001.html >> > >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Python-Dev mailing list >> Python-Dev@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >> >> >> End of Python-Dev Digest, Vol 108, Issue 7 >> ****************************************** >> > >
_______________________________________________ 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
