Scott Kitterman writes:
> On Tuesday, February 02, 2016 06:44:57 AM Ben Finney wrote:
> > Ben Finney writes:
> > > * Address all the language around Python 2 versus Python 3 versus
> > > Python general, and re-order or re-word to focus *primarily* on
> > > Python 3, with Python 2 treated as the
On Feb 16, 2016, at 11:54 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>I always thought it strange to put site- in /usr/local since
>/usr/local already implies site/system-wide packages. Same for dist-
>since /usr already implies distribution packages.
For as long as I can remember, a from-source 'configure && make &&
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I don't remember exactly why we called it 'site-packages' ...
Thanks for the history :)
I always thought it strange to put site- in /usr/local since
/usr/local already implies site/system-wide packages. Same for dist-
since /usr already imp
On Feb 15, 2016, at 07:42 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>I don't remember exactly why we called it 'site-packages', but I believe it
>was an evolution from the earlier ni.py module, which was where dotted module
>paths first showed up in Python.
And which had a 'site-python' directory, which was kept a
On Feb 16, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
>Side-note: does anyone know why Python puts packages in "dist-packages",
>"site-packages" etc directories instead of just "packages" directories?
I don't remember exactly why we called it 'site-packages', but I believe it
was an evolution from the e
On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> 2.5 Module Path
>
> "Public Python modules must be installed in the system Python modules
> directory, /usr/lib/python./dist-packages. Public Python 3 modules must
> be installed in /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages."
Side-note: does anyone kno
On Tuesday, February 02, 2016 06:44:57 AM Ben Finney wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
> > * Address all the language around Python 2 versus Python 3 versus
> >
> > Python general, and re-order or re-word to focus *primarily* on Python
> > 3, with Python 2 treated as the still-supported legacy syst
Ben Finney writes:
> * Address all the language around Python 2 versus Python 3 versus
> Python general, and re-order or re-word to focus *primarily* on Python
> 3, with Python 2 treated as the still-supported legacy system.
>
> I'm maintaining a Bazaar branch for this, feel free to get it::
Scott Kitterman writes:
> On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 04:46:19 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> ...
> > Once these non-semantic changes are accepted I will begin work on
> > the second stage of semantic changes.
> ...
>
> OK. Those are all accepted.
Thank you, Scott! I'll proceed with the semantic c
On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 04:46:19 PM Ben Finney wrote:
...
> Once these non-semantic changes are accepted I will begin work on the
> second stage of semantic changes.
...
OK. Those are all accepted. Barry Warsaw had done some changes in the -whl
section so I made an attempt at merging w
Scott Kitterman writes:
> I should be able to get it reviewed and merged no later than Saturday
> (probably Friday).
Much appreciated, thanks for the response.
--
\“When I was a baby I kept a diary. Recently I was re-reading |
`\ it, it said ‘Day 1: Still tired from the move. Day
On January 26, 2016 10:32:57 PM EST, Ben Finney
wrote:
>Dmitry Shachnev writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:46:19PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>> > I'm planning to provide changes in two bundles:
>> >
>> > * Go through the whole document and tidy it up for consistency,
>> > source style, m
Dmitry Shachnev writes:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:46:19PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > I'm planning to provide changes in two bundles:
> >
> > * Go through the whole document and tidy it up for consistency,
> > source style, markup, and language style. This should not change
> > the meanin
Hi Ben,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:46:19PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> I'm planning to provide changes in two bundles:
>
> * Go through the whole document and tidy it up for consistency, source
> style, markup, and language style. This should not change the meaning
> of anything, but will chang
Ben Finney writes:
> I'm planning to provide changes in two bundles:
>
> * Go through the whole document and tidy it up for consistency, source
> style, markup, and language style. This should not change the meaning
> of anything, but will change the wording of numerous passages.
>
> My pro
Ben Finney writes:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
>
> > At this point I think internal consistency is probably more
> > important, so if someone wants to go through and make all the
> > python's that should be python2, etc then please send in a patch.
>
> I'll take that on.
I'm planning to provide c
On January 24, 2016 11:59:14 PM EST, Ben Finney
wrote:
>Scott Kitterman writes:
>
>> On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:58:26 PM Ben Finney wrote:
>> > Found it; the source document is ‘python-policy.sgml’ in the source
>> > VCS for ‘python3’. Currently that's a Bazaar repository at
>> >
>.
>>
>>
Scott Kitterman writes:
> On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:58:26 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> > Found it; the source document is ‘python-policy.sgml’ in the source
> > VCS for ‘python3’. Currently that's a Bazaar repository at
> > .
>
> That's correct.
Hmm, apparently I've got the wrong thing. I've got
Thanks for taking this on Ben,
On Jan 24, 2016, at 04:33 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
>I think you're right that this needs a general clean-up through the
>policy document, to consistently use:
>
>* “python2” to refer to that command only;
>
>* “python3” to refer to that command only;
>
>* “python” to r
On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:58:26 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
> > Where is the Git (I assume?) repository you're using for VCS of this
> > policy document?
>
> Found it; the source document is ‘python-policy.sgml’ in the source VCS
> for ‘python3’. Currently that's a Bazaar repos
On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:33:55 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > I don't particularly agree, but if that's correct, then there's a
> > large amount of change needed throughout the policy. These certainly
> > aren't the only places this comes up.
>
> Yes, that's likely becau
On Sunday, January 24, 2016 04:46:09 PM Ben Finney wrote:
> Scott Kitterman writes:
> > I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I
> > think it needs to be updated for Stretch. The updates largely fall
> > into four categories: […]
>
> This is great to see, thank you Scott.
Ben Finney writes:
> Where is the Git (I assume?) repository you're using for VCS of this
> policy document?
Found it; the source document is ‘python-policy.sgml’ in the source VCS
for ‘python3’. Currently that's a Bazaar repository at
.
--
\ “The entertainment industry calls DRM "se
Scott Kitterman writes:
> I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I
> think it needs to be updated for Stretch. The updates largely fall
> into four categories: […]
This is great to see, thank you Scott.
Where is the Git (I assume?) repository you're using for VCS of thi
Scott Kitterman writes:
> I don't particularly agree, but if that's correct, then there's a
> large amount of change needed throughout the policy. These certainly
> aren't the only places this comes up.
Yes, that's likely because when the Debian Python policy was initially
drafted, there was no
On Saturday, January 23, 2016 08:50:49 PM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2016, at 03:38 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >Personally I seriously dislike the trend to call Python Python 2 (and I
> >still thing approving a pep to invent /usr/bin/python2 because Arch went
> >insane was a horrible idea).
On Jan 23, 2016, at 03:38 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>Personally I seriously dislike the trend to call Python Python 2 (and I still
>thing approving a pep to invent /usr/bin/python2 because Arch went insane was
>a horrible idea). There's an earlier spot in the document where it says that
>everyth
On Friday, January 22, 2016 05:55:19 PM Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 10:47 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I think it
> >needs to be updated for Stretch.
>
> Thanks Scott for the badly needed update.
>
> Some comments, apo
On Jan 21, 2016, at 10:47 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
>I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I think it
>needs to be updated for Stretch.
Thanks Scott for the badly needed update.
Some comments, apologies for the lack of good quoting, or if I've read the
diff incorrectly
I've taken a run through the current Python Policy to see where I think it
needs to be updated for Stretch. The updates largely fall into four
categories:
1. Update old examples
2. Clean up old policy test that no longer applies
3. Simplify things due to there only being one python version
4
30 matches
Mail list logo
