Re: [Python-Dev] Very old git mirror under github user "python-git"

2016-02-27 Thread Mathieu Dupuy 
Ahah. Obtaining his electronic coordinates like email to gently ask
him to pull it down by himself (otherwise we open fire). Because
having Github suddenly destroying the repo, even though the man
probably forgot about its existence might be a bit rude from the
polite people python developers are.

2016-02-16 4:27 UTC+08:00, Oleg Broytman :
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 09:16:56AM +1300, Greg Ewing
>  wrote:
>> Mathieu Dupuy wrote:
>> >A python representative (like Guido himself) should contact Github to
>> >obtain coordinates of the owner...
>>
>> ...and then order a drone strike on him?
>
>Yes, and then pry the repo from his cold dead fingers.
>
>Well, I hope prying can be done without striking first. ;-)
>
>> --
>> Greg
>
> Oleg.
> --
>  Oleg Broytmanhttp://phdru.name/[email protected]
>Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/deronnax%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows with MinGW

2016-02-27 Thread Giampaolo Rodola' 
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Walters 
wrote:

> No.
>
> Visual Studio is a solid compiler suit, mingw is a jenky mess, especially
> when you try and move to 64bit (where I don't think there is one true
> version of mingw).  I'm sorry that Visual Studio makes it very hard for you
> to contribute, but changing THE compiler of the distribution from the
> platform compiler, especially when we FINALLY got a stable abi with it, is
> going to be a non starter.
>
> Compiling on MinGW for your own edification is fine, but that's not the
> build platform for windows python, nor should it be. Contributions are, and
> should continue to be, tested against Visual Studio.
>
>
> On 2/26/2016 05:12, Mathieu Dupuy wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>> I am currently working on adding some functionality on a standard
>> library module (http://bugs.python.org/issue15873). The Python part
>> went fine, but now I have to do the C counterpart, and I have ran into
>> in several problems, which, stacked up, are a huge obstacle to easily
>> contribute further. Currently, despite I could work, I can't go
>> further
>> on my patch.
>>
>> I am currently working in very limited network, CPU and time
>> ressources* which are quite uncommon in the western world, but are
>> much less in the rest of the world. I have a 2GB/month mobile data
>> plan and a 100KB/s speed. For the C part of my patch, I should
>> download Visual Studio. The Express Edition 2015 is roughly 9GB. I
>> can't afford that.
>>
>> I downloaded Virtualbox and two Linux netinstall (Ubuntu 15.10 and
>> Fedora 23). Shortly, I couldn't get something working quickly and
>> simply (quickly = less than 2 hours, downloading time NOT included,
>> which is anyway way too already much). What went wrong and why it went
>> wrong could be a whole new thread and is outside of the scope of this
>> message.
>> Let me precise this : at my work I use many virtualbox instances
>> automatically fired and run in parallel to test new deployments and
>> run unittests. I like this tool,
>> but despite its simple look, it (most of the time) can not be used
>> simply by a profane. The concepts it requires you to understand are
>> not intuitive at first sight and there is *always* a thing that go
>> wrong (guest additions, mostly).(for example : Ubuntu and Virtualbox
>> shipped for a moment a broken version of mount.vboxsf, preventing
>> sharing folder to mount. Despite it's fixed, the broken releases
>> spread everywhere and you may encounter them a lot in various Ubuntu
>> and Virtualbox version. I downloaded the last versions of both and I
>> am yet infected. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12879). I could do
>> whole new thread on why you can't ask newcomers to use Virtualbox
>> (currently, at least).
>>
>> I ran into is a whole patch set to make CPython compile on MinGW
>> (https://bugs.python.org/issue3871#msg199695). But it is not denying
>> it's very experimental, and I know I would again spent useless hours
>> trying to get it work rather than joyfully improving Python, and
>> that's exactly what I do not want to happen.
>>
>> Getting ready to contribute to CPython pure python modules from an
>> standard, average mr-everyone Windows PC for a beginner-to-medium
>> contributor only require few megabytes of internet and few minutes of his
>> time: getting a tarball of CPython sources (or cloning the github CPython
>> mirror)**, a basic text editor and msys-git. The step further, if doing
>> some -even basic- C code is required, implies downloading 9GB of Visual
>> Studio and countless hours for it to be ready to use.
>> I think downloading the whole Visual Studio suite is a huge stopper to
>> contribute further for an average medium-or-below-contributor.
>>
>> I think (and I must not be the only one since CPython is to be moved
>> to github), that barriers to contribute to CPython should be set to
>> the lowest.
>> Of course my situation is a bit special but I think it represents
>> daily struggle of a *lot* of non-western programmer (at least for
>> limited internet)(even here in Australia, landline limited internet
>> connections are very common).
>> It's not a big deal if the MinGW result build is twenty time slower or
>> if some of the most advanced modules can't be build. But everyone
>> programmer should be able to easily make some C hacks and get them to
>> work.
>>
>> Hoping you'll be receptive to my pleas,
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> * I am currently picking fruits in the regional Australia. I live in a van
>> and have internet through with smartphone through an EDGE connection. I
>> can
>> plug the laptop in the farm but not in the van.
>> ** No fresh programmer use mercurial unless he has a gun pointed on his
>> head.
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe:
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium-list%40sdamon.com
>>
>
> _

Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows with MinGW

2016-02-27 Thread Franklin? Lee 
For this particular case, is there someone generous enough (or, can someone
apply for a PSF grant) to ship Mathieu a DVD/two/flash drive?
On Feb 26, 2016 12:18 PM, "Mathieu Dupuy"  wrote:

> Hi.
> I am currently working on adding some functionality on a standard
> library module (http://bugs.python.org/issue15873). The Python part
> went fine, but now I have to do the C counterpart, and I have ran into
> in several problems, which, stacked up, are a huge obstacle to easily
> contribute further. Currently, despite I could work, I can't go
> further
> on my patch.
>
> I am currently working in very limited network, CPU and time
> ressources* which are quite uncommon in the western world, but are
> much less in the rest of the world. I have a 2GB/month mobile data
> plan and a 100KB/s speed. For the C part of my patch, I should
> download Visual Studio. The Express Edition 2015 is roughly 9GB. I
> can't afford that.
>
> I downloaded Virtualbox and two Linux netinstall (Ubuntu 15.10 and
> Fedora 23). Shortly, I couldn't get something working quickly and
> simply (quickly = less than 2 hours, downloading time NOT included,
> which is anyway way too already much). What went wrong and why it went
> wrong could be a whole new thread and is outside of the scope of this
> message.
> Let me precise this : at my work I use many virtualbox instances
> automatically fired and run in parallel to test new deployments and
> run unittests. I like this tool,
> but despite its simple look, it (most of the time) can not be used
> simply by a profane. The concepts it requires you to understand are
> not intuitive at first sight and there is *always* a thing that go
> wrong (guest additions, mostly).(for example : Ubuntu and Virtualbox
> shipped for a moment a broken version of mount.vboxsf, preventing
> sharing folder to mount. Despite it's fixed, the broken releases
> spread everywhere and you may encounter them a lot in various Ubuntu
> and Virtualbox version. I downloaded the last versions of both and I
> am yet infected. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12879). I could do
> whole new thread on why you can't ask newcomers to use Virtualbox
> (currently, at least).
>
> I ran into is a whole patch set to make CPython compile on MinGW
> (https://bugs.python.org/issue3871#msg199695). But it is not denying
> it's very experimental, and I know I would again spent useless hours
> trying to get it work rather than joyfully improving Python, and
> that's exactly what I do not want to happen.
>
> Getting ready to contribute to CPython pure python modules from an
> standard, average mr-everyone Windows PC for a beginner-to-medium
> contributor only require few megabytes of internet and few minutes of his
> time: getting a tarball of CPython sources (or cloning the github CPython
> mirror)**, a basic text editor and msys-git. The step further, if doing
> some -even basic- C code is required, implies downloading 9GB of Visual
> Studio and countless hours for it to be ready to use.
> I think downloading the whole Visual Studio suite is a huge stopper to
> contribute further for an average medium-or-below-contributor.
>
> I think (and I must not be the only one since CPython is to be moved
> to github), that barriers to contribute to CPython should be set to
> the lowest.
> Of course my situation is a bit special but I think it represents
> daily struggle of a *lot* of non-western programmer (at least for
> limited internet)(even here in Australia, landline limited internet
> connections are very common).
> It's not a big deal if the MinGW result build is twenty time slower or
> if some of the most advanced modules can't be build. But everyone
> programmer should be able to easily make some C hacks and get them to
> work.
>
> Hoping you'll be receptive to my pleas,
> Cheers
>
>
> * I am currently picking fruits in the regional Australia. I live in a van
> and have internet through with smartphone through an EDGE connection. I can
> plug the laptop in the farm but not in the van.
> ** No fresh programmer use mercurial unless he has a gun pointed on his
> head.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/leewangzhong%2Bpython%40gmail.com
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows with MinGW

2016-02-27 Thread Alexander Walters 
The 9 gig initial download is not the only problem.  Visual studio is 
very bandwidth hungry in day to day operations (between polling websites 
and vcs remotes, near constant updating, integration with the VS web 
service, etc.).  You can of course shut all of that off, but it's a 
pain.  It's my understanding from Steve's post that a leaner, meaner 
edition of VS is in the works, so waiting for that might just be an 
overall better solution.


On 2/27/2016 16:27, Franklin? Lee wrote:


For this particular case, is there someone generous enough (or, can 
someone apply for a PSF grant) to ship Mathieu a DVD/two/flash drive?


On Feb 26, 2016 12:18 PM, "Mathieu Dupuy" > wrote:


Hi.
I am currently working on adding some functionality on a standard
library module (http://bugs.python.org/issue15873). The Python part
went fine, but now I have to do the C counterpart, and I have ran into
in several problems, which, stacked up, are a huge obstacle to easily
contribute further. Currently, despite I could work, I can't go
further
on my patch.

I am currently working in very limited network, CPU and time
ressources* which are quite uncommon in the western world, but are
much less in the rest of the world. I have a 2GB/month mobile data
plan and a 100KB/s speed. For the C part of my patch, I should
download Visual Studio. The Express Edition 2015 is roughly 9GB. I
can't afford that.

I downloaded Virtualbox and two Linux netinstall (Ubuntu 15.10 and
Fedora 23). Shortly, I couldn't get something working quickly and
simply (quickly = less than 2 hours, downloading time NOT included,
which is anyway way too already much). What went wrong and why it went
wrong could be a whole new thread and is outside of the scope of this
message.
Let me precise this : at my work I use many virtualbox instances
automatically fired and run in parallel to test new deployments and
run unittests. I like this tool,
but despite its simple look, it (most of the time) can not be used
simply by a profane. The concepts it requires you to understand are
not intuitive at first sight and there is *always* a thing that go
wrong (guest additions, mostly).(for example : Ubuntu and Virtualbox
shipped for a moment a broken version of mount.vboxsf, preventing
sharing folder to mount. Despite it's fixed, the broken releases
spread everywhere and you may encounter them a lot in various Ubuntu
and Virtualbox version. I downloaded the last versions of both and I
am yet infected. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12879). I could do
whole new thread on why you can't ask newcomers to use Virtualbox
(currently, at least).

I ran into is a whole patch set to make CPython compile on MinGW
(https://bugs.python.org/issue3871#msg199695). But it is not denying
it's very experimental, and I know I would again spent useless hours
trying to get it work rather than joyfully improving Python, and
that's exactly what I do not want to happen.

Getting ready to contribute to CPython pure python modules from an
standard, average mr-everyone Windows PC for a beginner-to-medium
contributor only require few megabytes of internet and few minutes
of his
time: getting a tarball of CPython sources (or cloning the github
CPython
mirror)**, a basic text editor and msys-git. The step further, if
doing
some -even basic- C code is required, implies downloading 9GB of
Visual
Studio and countless hours for it to be ready to use.
I think downloading the whole Visual Studio suite is a huge stopper to
contribute further for an average medium-or-below-contributor.

I think (and I must not be the only one since CPython is to be moved
to github), that barriers to contribute to CPython should be set to
the lowest.
Of course my situation is a bit special but I think it represents
daily struggle of a *lot* of non-western programmer (at least for
limited internet)(even here in Australia, landline limited internet
connections are very common).
It's not a big deal if the MinGW result build is twenty time slower or
if some of the most advanced modules can't be build. But everyone
programmer should be able to easily make some C hacks and get them to
work.

Hoping you'll be receptive to my pleas,
Cheers


* I am currently picking fruits in the regional Australia. I live
in a van
and have internet through with smartphone through an EDGE
connection. I can
plug the laptop in the farm but not in the van.
** No fresh programmer use mercurial unless he has a gun pointed
on his
head.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected] 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:

http

Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows with MinGW

2016-02-27 Thread Alexander Walters 
Theoretically yes.  Practically, I think, but do not know for sure, it 
would have the same annoying issues as other SDK builds (of which, the 
most annoying is just different paths for the tools). Making that a 
supported build would require some of the same effort as supporting any 
other compiler though (a build bot configured to compile python this way).


I also think, but am not sure, that what you linked is in fact the 
leaner meaner toolchain that Steve was referring to.



On 2/27/2016 16:49, Chris Krycho wrote:


Outsider/observer here; but is it not possible to build Python using 
the VS *toolchain* (compiler, linker, etc.) outside of VS itself—i.e. 
using MSBuild[1] and so on? That would remove the need for the full VS 
install, and is *much* smaller (~800MB after installation, rather than 
9GB). A lean and mean VS will be a great improvement regardless, but 
it seems like that would be a good intermediate solution if it’s possible.


[1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=49983

– Chris

On February 27, 2016 at 4:36:54 PM, Alexander Walters 
([email protected] ) wrote:


The 9 gig initial download is not the only problem. Visual studio is 
very bandwidth hungry in day to day operations (between polling 
websites and vcs remotes, near constant updating, integration with 
the VS web service, etc.).  You can of course shut all of that off, 
but it's a pain.  It's my understanding from Steve's post that a 
leaner, meaner edition of VS is in the works, so waiting for that 
might just be an overall better solution.


On 2/27/2016 16:27, Franklin? Lee wrote:


For this particular case, is there someone generous enough (or, can 
someone apply for a PSF grant) to ship Mathieu a DVD/two/flash drive?


On Feb 26, 2016 12:18 PM, "Mathieu Dupuy" > wrote:


Hi.
I am currently working on adding some functionality on a standard
library module (http://bugs.python.org/issue15873). The Python part
went fine, but now I have to do the C counterpart, and I have
ran into
in several problems, which, stacked up, are a huge obstacle to
easily
contribute further. Currently, despite I could work, I can't go
further
on my patch.

I am currently working in very limited network, CPU and time
ressources* which are quite uncommon in the western world, but are
much less in the rest of the world. I have a 2GB/month mobile data
plan and a 100KB/s speed. For the C part of my patch, I should
download Visual Studio. The Express Edition 2015 is roughly 9GB. I
can't afford that.

I downloaded Virtualbox and two Linux netinstall (Ubuntu 15.10 and
Fedora 23). Shortly, I couldn't get something working quickly and
simply (quickly = less than 2 hours, downloading time NOT included,
which is anyway way too already much). What went wrong and why
it went
wrong could be a whole new thread and is outside of the scope of
this
message.
Let me precise this : at my work I use many virtualbox instances
automatically fired and run in parallel to test new deployments and
run unittests. I like this tool,
but despite its simple look, it (most of the time) can not be used
simply by a profane. The concepts it requires you to understand are
not intuitive at first sight and there is *always* a thing that go
wrong (guest additions, mostly).(for example : Ubuntu and Virtualbox
shipped for a moment a broken version of mount.vboxsf, preventing
sharing folder to mount. Despite it's fixed, the broken releases
spread everywhere and you may encounter them a lot in various Ubuntu
and Virtualbox version. I downloaded the last versions of both and I
am yet infected. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12879). I
could do
whole new thread on why you can't ask newcomers to use Virtualbox
(currently, at least).

I ran into is a whole patch set to make CPython compile on MinGW
(https://bugs.python.org/issue3871#msg199695). But it is not denying
it's very experimental, and I know I would again spent useless hours
trying to get it work rather than joyfully improving Python, and
that's exactly what I do not want to happen.

Getting ready to contribute to CPython pure python modules from an
standard, average mr-everyone Windows PC for a beginner-to-medium
contributor only require few megabytes of internet and few
minutes of his
time: getting a tarball of CPython sources (or cloning the
github CPython
mirror)**, a basic text editor and msys-git. The step further,
if doing
some -even basic- C code is required, implies downloading 9GB of
Visual
Studio and countless hours for it to be ready to use.
I think downloading the whole Visual Studio suite is a huge
stopper to
contribute further for an average medium-or-below-contributor.

I think (and I must not be the on

Re: [Python-Dev] Very old git mirror under github user "python-git"

2016-02-27 Thread Alexander Walters 
Can we even ask github to pull it down and reasonably expect them to 
comply?  Their entire model is built on everyone forking everyone else.


On 2/27/2016 06:25, Mathieu Dupuy wrote:

Ahah. Obtaining his electronic coordinates like email to gently ask
him to pull it down by himself (otherwise we open fire). Because
having Github suddenly destroying the repo, even though the man
probably forgot about its existence might be a bit rude from the
polite people python developers are.

2016-02-16 4:27 UTC+08:00, Oleg Broytman :

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 09:16:56AM +1300, Greg Ewing
 wrote:

Mathieu Dupuy wrote:

A python representative (like Guido himself) should contact Github to
obtain coordinates of the owner...

...and then order a drone strike on him?

Yes, and then pry the repo from his cold dead fingers.

Well, I hope prying can be done without striking first. ;-)


--
Greg

Oleg.
--
  Oleg Broytmanhttp://phdru.name/[email protected]
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/deronnax%40gmail.com


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/tritium-list%40sdamon.com


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Very old git mirror under github user "python-git"

2016-02-27 Thread Matthias Bussonnier 
Hi all, 


> On Feb 27, 2016, at 14:21, Alexander Walters  wrote:
> 
> Can we even ask github to pull it down and reasonably expect them to comply?  
> Their entire model is built on everyone forking everyone else.

Why the model is everyone forking, some of the help page of GitHub actually 
tell you to contact GitHub support, like if you desire to "detach" a fork. 

Every reasonable requests I made to GitHub and the few interactions I had with 
the support always went well. 
This did include asking GitHub to contact user as their pages were confusing, 
and might be misleading others.

So I would suggest 

1) asking GitHub to contact author, potentially forwarding him/her a message 
from this list asking him/her to bring that down or transfer the control to you.
That should be easy to do as it will not force GitHub to provide anyone with 
the emails of the the owner of python-git.

2) in the case of no response from author ask politely GitHub that the repo is 
confusing for user, and ask what they can do about that.

3) If still nothing can be done make a DMCA request. You can likely argue that 
the logo/name are used without PSF content. 
https://help.github.com/articles/dmca-takedown-policy/ 
 

This would likely have more impact if sent from someone part of 
https://github.com/python 

-- 
M




___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Very old git mirror under github user "python-git"

2016-02-27 Thread Ian Lee 
> On Feb 27, 2016, at 14:21, Alexander Walters  wrote:
> 
> Can we even ask github to pull it down and reasonably expect them to comply?  
> Their entire model is built on everyone forking everyone else.

As a data point — I had a pretty good experience with GitHub helping me out 
when I was trying to reclaim an organization using my company name. In that 
case it turned out that they just gave me the contact for the person and I 
worked it out from there, but it’d seemed like they were willing to take a 
more… forceful approach if it was needed.

Perhaps the better / easier solution is to promote the *real* “Sem-official 
read-only mirror of the Python Mercurial repository” [1] ? And perhaps this 
goes away entirely (in time) with PEP-512 [2]?

[1] https://github.com/python/cpython 
[2] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0512/ 
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows withMinGW

2016-02-27 Thread Steve Dower 
Yep, that link is part of what I was talking about, though really it's one of a 
few experiments we're working on right now for making the build tools more 
accessible. I'm not sure it is currently sufficient for building CPython, but 
that's why I'm working with the team on these - what is eventually settled on 
should support all of the cases we care about here.

Top-posted from my Windows Phone

-Original Message-
From: "Alexander Walters" 
Sent: ‎2/‎27/‎2016 14:16
To: "Chris Krycho" ; "[email protected]" 

Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Python should be easily compilable on Windows 
withMinGW

Theoretically yes.  Practically, I think, but do not know for sure, it would 
have the same annoying issues as other SDK builds (of which, the most annoying 
is just different paths for the tools).  Making that a supported build would 
require some of the same effort as supporting any other compiler though (a 
build bot configured to compile python this way).

I also think, but am not sure, that what you linked is in fact the leaner 
meaner toolchain that Steve was referring to.



On 2/27/2016 16:49, Chris Krycho wrote:

Outsider/observer here; but is it not possible to build Python using the VS 
*toolchain* (compiler, linker, etc.) outside of VS itself—i.e. using MSBuild[1] 
and so on? That would remove the need for the full VS install, and is *much* 
smaller (~800MB after installation, rather than 9GB). A lean and mean VS will 
be a great improvement regardless, but it seems like that would be a good 
intermediate solution if it’s possible.
[1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=49983
– Chris


On February 27, 2016 at 4:36:54 PM, Alexander Walters ([email protected]) 
wrote:
The 9 gig initial download is not the only problem.  Visual studio is very 
bandwidth hungry in day to day operations (between polling websites and vcs 
remotes, near constant updating, integration with the VS web service, etc.).  
You can of course shut all of that off, but it's a pain.  It's my understanding 
from Steve's post that a leaner, meaner edition of VS is in the works, so 
waiting for that might just be an overall better solution.

On 2/27/2016 16:27, Franklin? Lee wrote:

For this particular case, is there someone generous enough (or, can someone 
apply for a PSF grant) to ship Mathieu a DVD/two/flash drive?
On Feb 26, 2016 12:18 PM, "Mathieu Dupuy"  wrote:

Hi.
I am currently working on adding some functionality on a standard
library module (http://bugs.python.org/issue15873). The Python part
went fine, but now I have to do the C counterpart, and I have ran into
in several problems, which, stacked up, are a huge obstacle to easily
contribute further. Currently, despite I could work, I can't go
further
on my patch.

I am currently working in very limited network, CPU and time
ressources* which are quite uncommon in the western world, but are
much less in the rest of the world. I have a 2GB/month mobile data
plan and a 100KB/s speed. For the C part of my patch, I should
download Visual Studio. The Express Edition 2015 is roughly 9GB. I
can't afford that.

I downloaded Virtualbox and two Linux netinstall (Ubuntu 15.10 and
Fedora 23). Shortly, I couldn't get something working quickly and
simply (quickly = less than 2 hours, downloading time NOT included,
which is anyway way too already much). What went wrong and why it went
wrong could be a whole new thread and is outside of the scope of this
message.
Let me precise this : at my work I use many virtualbox instances
automatically fired and run in parallel to test new deployments and
run unittests. I like this tool,
but despite its simple look, it (most of the time) can not be used
simply by a profane. The concepts it requires you to understand are
not intuitive at first sight and there is *always* a thing that go
wrong (guest additions, mostly).(for example : Ubuntu and Virtualbox
shipped for a moment a broken version of mount.vboxsf, preventing
sharing folder to mount. Despite it's fixed, the broken releases
spread everywhere and you may encounter them a lot in various Ubuntu
and Virtualbox version. I downloaded the last versions of both and I
am yet infected. https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/12879). I could do
whole new thread on why you can't ask newcomers to use Virtualbox
(currently, at least).

I ran into is a whole patch set to make CPython compile on MinGW
(https://bugs.python.org/issue3871#msg199695). But it is not denying
it's very experimental, and I know I would again spent useless hours
trying to get it work rather than joyfully improving Python, and
that's exactly what I do not want to happen.

Getting ready to contribute to CPython pure python modules from an
standard, average mr-everyone Windows PC for a beginner-to-medium
contributor only require few megabytes of internet and few minutes of his
time: getting a tarball of CPython sources (or cloning the github CPython
mirror)**, a basic text editor and msys-git. The step further

Re: [Python-Dev] Very old git mirror under github user "python-git"

2016-02-27 Thread Senthil Kumaran 
> On Feb 27 2016, at 2:47 pm, Ian Lee  wrote:  

>

> Perhaps the better / easier solution is to promote the *real* “Sem-official
read-only mirror of the Python Mercurial repository” [1] ? And perhaps this
goes away entirely (in time) with PEP-512 [2]?  

  

We will be working to promote the github repo, once the migration and PEP-512
is complete.

Promoting semi-official repo in the interim (as opposed the active one in
hg.python.org) does not seem like a good idea.

  

This thread about claiming ownership of look-alike repo and we could
concentrate our discussion on that alone.

  

FWIW, that old look-alike (python-dev) repo as been in existence for years now
and it has not caused any confusion. Once python moves to github, I think, we
can ask for some logo or some kind of validation that will help users easily
identify the originality.

  

  

Thanks,

Senthil

  

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com