Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

On Nov 24, 2016, at 10:05, Eric V. Smith wrote: > On Nov 24, 2016, at 10:00 AM, R. David Murray wrote: >> (I thought we had actually introduced a check for it in the Makefile, but >> I guess not...that would make it inconvenient for someone to

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

> On Nov 24, 2016, at 10:00 AM, R. David Murray wrote: > Right, tracking those artifacts is a long standing policy and exists > for good reasons. Our policy is that the committed changes should > be done with the "right" version of the tool to minimize churn, and > I

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 12:22:00 +0100, Victor Stinner wrote: > I know that tracking generated files is not pure, but it's very > convenient, so please keep them: configure, Python/importlib.h, > Python/importlib_external.h, etc.! > > When testing Python on some "custom"

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

I know that tracking generated files is not pure, but it's very convenient, so please keep them: configure, Python/importlib.h, Python/importlib_external.h, etc.! When testing Python on some "custom" operating systems, I already had enough issues to compile Python :-) For example, on

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

On 11/24/2016 02:51 AM, Martin Panter wrote: > FWIW I make heavy use of the Mercurial interactive patch mode. I use > it to filter out any unnecessary generated changes, while selecting > other generated changes relevant to a patch. I.e. I did not know the hg interactive mode, thanks for the tip

Re: [python-committers] autoconf 2.70

середа, 23 листопада 2016 р. 08:38:40 EET Xavier de Gaye написано: > From the configure logs since last july, it seems that Benjamin and Serhiy > are the only one using autoconf 2.70: > > changeset 102530:b04560c3ce69 - author Benjamin Peterson > changeset 103648:816ae3abd928 - author