On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:35 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 at 18:26, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds like general consensus that 3.0.2 isn't worth it. Is an
>>> announcement on c.l.p.a and something on www.python.org enough t
David Goodger schrieb:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray wrote:
>> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
>> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
>> in the Core sprint...
>
> We actually had a room or two for evening videos at a PyCon (both?)
Georg Brandl schrieb:
> David Goodger schrieb:
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 14:56, R. David Murray wrote:
>>> I can see it now...the TV and movie track at PyCon 2010,
>>> with attendance mandatory for anyone wanting to participate
>>> in the Core sprint...
>> We actually had a room or two for evening
I've been analyzing how much of the Python code is covered
by the contributor agreements in the PSF's possession.
The logs show four mysterious IDs of the form uid; I'd like to
figure out who two of those IDs were. (Two of the IDs are gone in
3.1-trunk, so I don't care about them.)
uid26747
[A.M. Kuchling]
> I've been analyzing how much of the Python code is covered
> by the contributor agreements in the PSF's possession.
>
> The logs show four mysterious IDs of the form uid; I'd like to
> figure out who two of those IDs were. (Two of the IDs are gone in
> 3.1-trunk, so I don't c
>> r21474 | uid26747 | 2001-07-04 18:11:22 -0400 (Wed, 04 Jul 2001) | 11 lines
>>
>> Added a non-recursive implementation of conjoin(), and a Knight's Tour
>> solver. ...
>
> 100% sure that was indeed me. No idea how it showed up as "uid26747",
> though -- that rings no bells at all.
Try logging
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anthony Baxter wrote:
> The particulars of the revision control system don't matter as much as
> the discipline of teaching people to commit fixes. Right now, we have
> 2.6.x, 3.0.x and 3.1.x.
And trunk and py3k.
Having the right technology helps. T
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brett Cannon wrote:
> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> another point release since 3.1 followed 3.0 so closely and didn't
> introduce any
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 18:27, Jesus Cea wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
>> 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
>> another point release sin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Please, somebody fix the reply-to :)
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
>> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>> Using svnmerge to commit to three branches in addition to trunk
>> is
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 15:27, Jesus Cea wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > If I remember correctly I believe we decided at the language summit that
> > 3.0 is just dead now that 3.1 is out and we shouldn't even bother with
> > another point releas
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 15:34, Jesus Cea wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Please, somebody fix the reply-to :)
>
> A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 02:34:38PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
> >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 at 02:13, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> >> Usin
On Jul 3, 2009, at 6:32 PM, David Goodger wrote:
I followed up with a python.org front-page news item & PSF blog entry
(both linking to that message on python-list).
I added some text to the Python 3.0.1 download page and added a link
to Python 3.1.
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a
13 matches
Mail list logo
