Re: [Python-Dev] My fork lacks a 3.7 branch - can I create it somehow?
On Tue, 22 May 2018 19:10:49 -0500 Tim Peters wrote: > [Nathaniel Smith ] > > ... > > As far as git is concerned, the main repo on github, your fork on > > github, and your local repo are 3 independent repositories, equally > > valid. The relationships between them are purely a matter of > > convention. > > Thanks for that! It instantly cleared up several mysteries for me. > I'm just starting to learn git & github, and am starkly reminded of an > old truth: there is absolutely nothing "obvious" about source-control > systems, or workflows, before you already know them ;-) I think you'll find out that git can be especially non-obvious :-) Regards Antoine. ___ 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] My fork lacks a 3.7 branch - can I create it somehow?
Tim Peters writes: > there is absolutely nothing "obvious" about source-control systems, > or workflows, before you already know them ;-) Obvious, adj.: More an expletive than a true adjective, shows a state of mind in which the speaker is comfortable that a statement fits her preconceptions. Conveys little, if any, information. Syn.: intuitive, natural. -- The *New* New Devil's Dictionary ___ 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] My fork lacks a 3.7 branch - can I create it somehow?
On 23 May 2018 at 09:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2018 19:10:49 -0500 > Tim Peters wrote: > >> Thanks for that! It instantly cleared up several mysteries for me. >> I'm just starting to learn git & github, and am starkly reminded of an >> old truth: there is absolutely nothing "obvious" about source-control >> systems, or workflows, before you already know them ;-) > > I think you'll find out that git can be especially non-obvious :-) My understanding is that git becomes more obvious when you understand that it's not actually a source control system at all but rather a data model for text and changes. (Or something like that, I haven't reached that level of enlightenment myself yet...) Paul ___ 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-committers] FINAL WEEK FOR 3.7.0 CHANGES!
15.05.18 14:51, Ned Deily пише: This is it! We are down to THE FINAL WEEK for 3.7.0! Please get your feature fixes, bug fixes, and documentation updates in before 2018-05-21 ~23:59 Anywhere on Earth (UTC-12:00). That's about 7 days from now. We will then tag and produce the 3.7.0 release candidate. Our goal continues been to be to have no changes between the release candidate and final; AFTER NEXT WEEK'S RC1, CHANGES APPLIED TO THE 3.7 BRANCH WILL BE RELEASED IN 3.7.1. Please double-check that there are no critical problems outstanding and that documentation for new features in 3.7 is complete (including NEWS and What's New items), and that 3.7 is getting exposure and tested with our various platorms and third-party distributions and applications. Those of us who are participating in the development sprints at PyCon US 2018 here in Cleveland can feel the excitement building as we work through the remaining issues, including completing the "What's New in 3.7" document and final feature documentation. (We wish you could all be here.) Is it possible to add yet one beta instead? CI was broken for few latest days, tests are not passed on my computer still (and fail on some buildbots), updating What's New exposed new features which need additional testing (and maybe fixing or reverting), and I'm not comfortable about some changes which would be harder to fix after the release. ___ 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-committers] FINAL WEEK FOR 3.7.0 CHANGES!
Ah, Python doesn't compile on Windows anymore :-) https://bugs.python.org/issue33614 Victor 2018-05-23 14:16 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > 2018-05-23 13:45 GMT+02:00 Serhiy Storchaka : >> CI was broken for few latest days, tests are not passed on my computer still >> (and fail on some buildbots), (...) > > I looked at buildbots and I confirm that many of the 3.x buildbots are red: > > AMD64 FreeBSD 10.x Shared 3.x > AMD64 Windows8.1 Non-Debug 3.x > ARMv7 Ubuntu 3.x > PPC64 Fedora 3.x > s390x RHEL 3.x > x86 Gentoo Installed with X 3.x > x86 Gentoo Refleaks 3.x > AMD64 Windows8.1 Refleaks 3.x > > Victor ___ 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-committers] FINAL WEEK FOR 3.7.0 CHANGES!
2018-05-23 13:45 GMT+02:00 Serhiy Storchaka : > CI was broken for few latest days, tests are not passed on my computer still > (and fail on some buildbots), (...) I looked at buildbots and I confirm that many of the 3.x buildbots are red: AMD64 FreeBSD 10.x Shared 3.x AMD64 Windows8.1 Non-Debug 3.x ARMv7 Ubuntu 3.x PPC64 Fedora 3.x s390x RHEL 3.x x86 Gentoo Installed with X 3.x x86 Gentoo Refleaks 3.x AMD64 Windows8.1 Refleaks 3.x Victor ___ 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-committers] FINAL WEEK FOR 3.7.0 CHANGES!
On May 23, 2018, at 07:45, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 15.05.18 14:51, Ned Deily пише: >> This is it! We are down to THE FINAL WEEK for 3.7.0! Please get your >> feature fixes, bug fixes, and documentation updates in before >> 2018-05-21 ~23:59 Anywhere on Earth (UTC-12:00). That's about 7 days >> from now. We will then tag and produce the 3.7.0 release candidate. >> Our goal continues been to be to have no changes between the release >> candidate and final; AFTER NEXT WEEK'S RC1, CHANGES APPLIED TO THE 3.7 >> BRANCH WILL BE RELEASED IN 3.7.1. Please double-check that there are >> no critical problems outstanding and that documentation for new >> features in 3.7 is complete (including NEWS and What's New items), and >> that 3.7 is getting exposure and tested with our various platorms and >> third-party distributions and applications. Those of us who are >> participating in the development sprints at PyCon US 2018 here in >> Cleveland can feel the excitement building as we work through the >> remaining issues, including completing the "What's New in 3.7" >> document and final feature documentation. (We wish you could all be >> here.) > Is it possible to add yet one beta instead? > > CI was broken for few latest days, tests are not passed on my computer still > (and fail on some buildbots), updating What's New exposed new features which > need additional testing (and maybe fixing or reverting), and I'm not > comfortable about some changes which would be harder to fix after the release. it is possible but there's no point in doing either another beta or a release candidate until we understand and address the current blocking issues, like the major buildbot failures. We have another 24 hours until rc1 was planned to be tagged. Let's keep working on the known issues and we will make a decision then. -- Ned Deily [email protected] -- [] ___ 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] PEP: 576 Title: Rationalize Built-in function classes
On 23 May 2018 at 05:47, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Steve Dower > wrote: > >> On 22May2018 0741, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> >>> ISTR there are plenty of PEPs that never get posted to python-ideas >>> because they are discussed on a separate list. >>> >> >> There are often better venues for the initial discussion (such as >> security-sig, distutils-sig or datetime-sig), but I think that's orthogonal >> from posting the full text of a PEP. >> > > I don't think that the original rationale for posting the full text of a > PEP to a mailing list still applies. The raw text is on GitHub in the > python/peps repo, and the formatted text is on python.org. We're not some > kind of bureaucratic org that pretends to still live in the world of paper > and pencil. > The raw text being on Github rather than hg.python.org makes the rationale for archiving full copies on mail.python.org stronger, not weaker. That said, if the aim is to keep discussion in another place (such as >> github), you really don't want copies floating around any other mailing >> lists. Eventually I'd hope it comes through for final review though, as I'm >> sure a number of us are unlikely to click through to github unless we have >> a specific interest in the topic. > > > > IMO if you can't be bothered to click through on GitHub you forfeit your > right to comment. (Which isn't a right anyway, it's a privilege.) > I would never consider it an acceptable process restriction to require people to sign up for an account with a proprietary American software company in order to comment on the future of the Python programming language. If folks get more feedback than they have the ability to process in a short amount of time, then "Deferred" is a perfectly reasonable state to put a PEP into until they *do* have time to go through and account for the feedback - it isn't like it's a major disaster if we put an idea back on the shelf for a couple of months (or years!), let folks mull it over for a while, and then reconsider it later with fresh eyes. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia ___ 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] My fork lacks a 3.7 branch - can I create it somehow?
On 23 May 2018 at 19:25, Paul Moore wrote: > On 23 May 2018 at 09:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > On Tue, 22 May 2018 19:10:49 -0500 > > Tim Peters wrote: > > > >> Thanks for that! It instantly cleared up several mysteries for me. > >> I'm just starting to learn git & github, and am starkly reminded of an > >> old truth: there is absolutely nothing "obvious" about source-control > >> systems, or workflows, before you already know them ;-) > > > > I think you'll find out that git can be especially non-obvious :-) > > My understanding is that git becomes more obvious when you understand > that it's not actually a source control system at all but rather a > data model for text and changes. (Or something like that, I haven't > reached that level of enlightenment myself yet...) > For data structure wonks, http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/ can be more informative than any number of git usage guides :) The mapping from command line incantations to their effect on the DAG can be a little (*cough*) obscure, but having the right mental model of what's going on at a data structure level can still help enormously. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia ___ 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] PEP: 576 Title: Rationalize Built-in function classes
We should take the discussion about how and where PEP discussions should be hosted off this thread and list. On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 23 May 2018 at 05:47, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Steve Dower >> wrote: >> >>> On 22May2018 0741, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> ISTR there are plenty of PEPs that never get posted to python-ideas because they are discussed on a separate list. >>> >>> There are often better venues for the initial discussion (such as >>> security-sig, distutils-sig or datetime-sig), but I think that's orthogonal >>> from posting the full text of a PEP. >>> >> >> I don't think that the original rationale for posting the full text of a >> PEP to a mailing list still applies. The raw text is on GitHub in the >> python/peps repo, and the formatted text is on python.org. We're not >> some kind of bureaucratic org that pretends to still live in the world of >> paper and pencil. >> > > The raw text being on Github rather than hg.python.org makes the > rationale for archiving full copies on mail.python.org stronger, not > weaker. > > That said, if the aim is to keep discussion in another place (such as >>> github), you really don't want copies floating around any other mailing >>> lists. Eventually I'd hope it comes through for final review though, as I'm >>> sure a number of us are unlikely to click through to github unless we have >>> a specific interest in the topic. >> >> >> >> IMO if you can't be bothered to click through on GitHub you forfeit your >> right to comment. (Which isn't a right anyway, it's a privilege.) >> > > I would never consider it an acceptable process restriction to require > people to sign up for an account with a proprietary American software > company in order to comment on the future of the Python programming > language. > > If folks get more feedback than they have the ability to process in a > short amount of time, then "Deferred" is a perfectly reasonable state to > put a PEP into until they *do* have time to go through and account for the > feedback - it isn't like it's a major disaster if we put an idea back on > the shelf for a couple of months (or years!), let folks mull it over for a > while, and then reconsider it later with fresh eyes. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Nick Coghlan | [email protected] | Brisbane, Australia > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) ___ 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
