Hi Guido,
> But I do want to emphasize that not everyone experiences the same dread
when requested to use a GitHub issue that you and Raymond seem to feel.
If I understand this correctly, it was not about the dread, but the overall
context already preserved in this discussion.
The feedback
TBH, for me it's quite the opposite. There are too many mailing list
threads and it's often hard to catch up on them because there's a lot of
pointless back and forth and quite frequently the discussion diverges to
topics that are not of interest. I am used to having many important design
I have to say that I agree with Raymond here. I don't think that an
issue tracker is a good way to collect this sort of feedback. To be
honest, I don't feel that there's going to be much scope to address
the sorts of concerns being raised here, so I'm not clear how much
value there will be in the
Are you saying that this whole thread of issues will be ignored unless we all
go to another forum, post a dozen separate issues, and recreate all of the
discussion that already these threads?
That doesn't seem reasonable to me for several reasons: 1) it is unlikely that
the full thread content
Sorry, but please leave comments in the GitHub issue, one feature request
per comment. This will allow people to give +1 reaction to your request
https://github.com/python/core-workflow/issues/359
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 2:30 AM Steve Dower wrote:
> On 11Sep2019 1117, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
On 11Sep2019 1117, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:17:48AM +0100, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
In other words, vanilla GitHub issue search does address Raymond's request?
Given that github search is unlikely to be able to search "our
voluminous history of already evaluated and
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:17:48AM +0100, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
[Steven]
> > Having said that, the "Filters" feature does seem to do the trick. I
> > just tried it on a project I picked at random:
> >
> > https://github.com/sorccu/cufon/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen
> >
> > and it seems
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019, at 00:32, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 09:49:00AM +0100, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2019, at 06:54, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > > Another essential bit of tooling for the migration:
> > >
> > > * Before filing a bug report
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 09:49:00AM +0100, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019, at 06:54, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > Another essential bit of tooling for the migration:
> >
> > * Before filing a bug report or feature request, we ask people to
> > search to see if there is
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019, at 06:54, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Another essential bit of tooling for the migration:
>
> * Before filing a bug report or feature request, we ask people to
> search to see if there is already an issue in progress or a resolved
> issue on the topic. We need to make
Another essential bit of tooling for the migration:
* Before filing a bug report or feature request, we ask people to search to see
if there is already an issue in progress or a resolved issue on the topic. We
need to make sure that on GitHub issues, people can still search our voluminous
> On Aug 27, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Mariatta wrote:
>
> (cross posting to python-committers, python-dev, core-workflow)
>
> PEP 581: Using GitHub Issues has been accepted by the steering council, but
> PEP 588: GitHub Issues Migration plan is still in progress.
>
> I'd like to hear from core
> On Aug 27, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Mariatta wrote:
>
> (cross posting to python-committers, python-dev, core-workflow)
>
> PEP 581: Using GitHub Issues has been accepted by the steering council, but
> PEP 588: GitHub Issues Migration plan is still in progress.
>
> I'd like to hear from core
13 matches
Mail list logo
