On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall
>>> back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?"
>>
>> That would make plenty of s
David Abrahams wrote:
On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
Would it make sense if Dave acted as second as in "person we fall
back upon if the primaries can't figure it out?"
That would make plenty of sense to me. I'd be very happy to have
others leading the mentoring effort.
> >> On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as
> >>>
> >>> David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for
> >>> this ?
> >>
> >> Sure, I'd be glad to
> >
> > Would it make sense if Dave
On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
On 13 Mar 2009 at 12:10, David Abrahams wrote:
On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld
wrote:
I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as
David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for
this ?
On 13 Mar 2009 at 12:10, David Abrahams wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld
> wrote:
>
> > I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as
> >
> > David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for
> > this ?
>
> Sure, I'd be glad to
Wou
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Stefan Seefeld
wrote:
I'm willing to participate, in particular, if other folks such as
David, I notice you already indicated support. Could we team up for
this ?
Sure, I'd be glad to
___
Niall Douglas wrote:
I would say that any GSoC project should choose *one* of the above
rather than try combining them. Better to do one thing well and in
stages than many things at once (unless you have loads of spare
time!).
I agree. (I wouldn't mind seeing projects for all of the abov
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:50 AM, Niall Douglas
wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2009 at 13:42, Ravi wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 11 March 2009 12:38:55 Haoyu Bai wrote:
>> > > 1. Thread safety
>> > > 2. PyFinalize support
>> > > 3. Easier methods to write to_python/from_python converters
>> > > 4. Python 3.0 suppor
I should add that the deadline for this appears to be tomorrow (the
12th).
Niall
On 11 Mar 2009 at 20:50, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2009 at 13:42, Ravi wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday 11 March 2009 12:38:55 Haoyu Bai wrote:
> > > > 1. Thread safety
> > > > 2. PyFinalize support
> > > > 3. Eas
On 11 Mar 2009 at 13:42, Ravi wrote:
> On Wednesday 11 March 2009 12:38:55 Haoyu Bai wrote:
> > > 1. Thread safety
> > > 2. PyFinalize support
> > > 3. Easier methods to write to_python/from_python converters
> > > 4. Python 3.0 support
> > > 5. Ability to extend the fundamental PyTypeObject used
On Wednesday 11 March 2009 12:38:55 Haoyu Bai wrote:
> > 1. Thread safety
> > 2. PyFinalize support
> > 3. Easier methods to write to_python/from_python converters
> > 4. Python 3.0 support
> > 5. Ability to extend the fundamental PyTypeObject used by boost.python
>
> Thanks! Seems there's a lot of
11 matches
Mail list logo
