On 28.04.09 14:58, Andreas Jung wrote:
On 28.04.2009 14:51 Uhr, Chris Withers wrote:
Andreas Jung wrote:
it is known that the latest setuptools version produces broken
packages with SVN 1.6 checkouts. Could we get a fixed setuptools
version asap - fixing this issue is essential
Hi,
I'm playing lately with distutils (on the 2.7a branch).
This sudden interest has been triggered by the python bugs:
http://bugs.python.org/issue5941
http://bugs.python.org/issue5940
What I've found (IMHO) is the lack of proper logging while stepping through
all the loops inside the code.
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:36 PM, A. Cavallo a.cava...@cavallinux.eu wrote:
Hi,
I'm playing lately with distutils (on the 2.7a branch).
This sudden interest has been triggered by the python bugs:
http://bugs.python.org/issue5941
http://bugs.python.org/issue5940
What I've found (IMHO) is
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see any advantage, in the context of this discussion, to
having an additional, incompatible naming for full-path-to-a-class.
Setuptools doesn't limit an entry point to being a class,
At 10:59 AM 5/6/2009 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see any advantage, in the context of this discussion, to
having an additional, incompatible naming for full-path-to-a-class.
Setuptools
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 6, 2009, at 1:46 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 10:59 AM 5/6/2009 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see any advantage, in the context of this discussion, to
having an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 6, 2009, at 1:46 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 10:59 AM 5/6/2009 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see
At 08:28 PM 5/6/2009 +0200, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 6, 2009, at 1:46 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 10:59 AM 5/6/2009 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On May 5, 2009, at 10:50 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 12:03 PM 5/6/2009 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
I don't see any advantage, in
At 08:58 PM 5/6/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Sorry to post again that mail, but it seems that this is the last remaining
issue for the versionning proposal.
Phillip, could you check my proposal for your development versions of
postreleases
use case ?
Is the code up-to-date with the below?
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
I'd be tempted to call this an edge-case. You should be able to expose
the internal detail you'd need via a module scope alias for the
particular case. That seems easier than providing a whole new notion.
I'm
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:20 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 08:58 PM 5/6/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Sorry to post again that mail, but it seems that this is the last
remaining
issue for the versionning proposal.
Phillip, could you check my proposal for your development
Ian Bicking wrote:
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com
mailto:tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
I'm actually a big fan of the ':', because it makes explicit the
difference between the import and the named thing, even for
module-scoped names.
Yeah, I
12 matches
Mail list logo
