Virgil Dupras wrote:
On 2/19/08, Virgil Dupras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
closed_status = db.status.lookup('chatting')
Oops, replace 'chatting' with 'closed'
Ok, I ran the script. It said
Low activity tickets (180 days) broken down per resolution status:
- no selection -547
wont fi
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> It must have changed since I last looked at a feature request on the
>> tracker - using a type rather than keyword is fine by me.
>
> I'm fairly certain the rfe type was there ever since the switchover
> (at least that's what subversion says: the rfe type was added along
I consider a feature request something like asking a factorial method (
http://bugs.python.org/issue2138). As for the RFE, (from Wikipedia) "while
not technically a bug, it is often tracked in the same manner as a bug as it
represents a failure to meet expected behavior, or simply out of
convenienc
On 20 Feb, 17:39, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not sure, I've seen more than one library and server supporting
> > the CCC command.
> > For example proftpd and tnftpd servers support it.
>
> But does anyone use it?
>
It is useful to permit passive connection behind firewall dev
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2008 12:39 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Feb 20, 2008 12:36 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I agree, the name is a bit confusing when you're not used to it.
>>> Renaming it is easy. To the native speakers reading it: Wha
> > Renaming it is easy. To the native speakers reading it: What should
> > it be called? (please try to come up with something shorter than
> > "request for enhancement")
> >
>
> "feature request"?
How about calling it just "enhancement"?
___
Pytho
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 12:37:42PM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> How about marking already submitted patches as easy to get help
> reviewing? For instance, there are a bunch of test rewrites to move
> old tests to unittest where it would be rather nice to have another
> pair of eyes make sure that t
On Feb 20, 2008 12:39 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2008 12:36 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I agree, the name is a bit confusing when you're not used to it.
> >
> > Renaming it is easy. To the native speakers reading it: What should
> > it be cal
> It must have changed since I last looked at a feature request on the
> tracker - using a type rather than keyword is fine by me.
I'm fairly certain the rfe type was there ever since the switchover
(at least that's what subversion says: the rfe type was added along
with all other types in r52825
On Feb 20, 2008 12:36 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree, the name is a bit confusing when you're not used to it.
>
> Renaming it is easy. To the native speakers reading it: What should
> it be called? (please try to come up with something shorter than
> "request for enhan
On Feb 20, 2008 8:03 AM, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We have a bug day this Saturday. Join us on IRC and let's see how
> many issues we can clear up.
>
> http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonBugDay for more.
>
> There are currently 69 bugs marked as 'easy', which is probably more
> tha
> I agree, the name is a bit confusing when you're not used to it.
Renaming it is easy. To the native speakers reading it: What should
it be called? (please try to come up with something shorter than
"request for enhancement")
> Also I find that, by definition, RFE and feature requests are not
>
> > I suggest using socket.dup(sslsock) to simply create a non-encrypted
> > copy of the socket, and switch to using that copy. There's no way to
> > "unwrap" an SSLSocket.
>
> It does not seem to work:
>
> File "C:\python26\lib\ssl.py", line 115, in read
>return self._sslobj.read(len)
> ss
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 1:52 AM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Also, it would be useful to have a new method, float.is_integer(). This
>> would be better than the current approach where we make the
>> test: if x == floor(x).
>
> Ho
We have a bug day this Saturday. Join us on IRC and let's see how
many issues we can clear up.
http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonBugDay for more.
There are currently 69 bugs marked as 'easy', which is probably more
than enough, but if you see anything that's suitable for a new
developer, please
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008, Andrew MacIntyre wrote:
>
> I've now written up my testing and attached the write-up to issue 2039
> (http://bugs.python.org/issue2039).
Nice work! Too often we (generic we) don't try to re-simplify code.
--
Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncr
On 20 Feb, 06:08, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suggest using socket.dup(sslsock) to simply create a non-encrypted
> copy of the socket, and switch to using that copy. There's no way to
> "unwrap" an SSLSocket.
It does not seem to work:
File "C:\python26\lib\ssl.py", line 115, in
Andrew MacIntyre wrote:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> If we're down to voting, here's my vote:
>>
>> +1 on removing the freelists from ints and floats, but not the
>>small int sharing optimization
>>
>> +1 on focusing on improving pymalloc to handle int and float
>>object allocations even bette
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> Problem is, we don't have an 'rfe' keyword anymore :)
>>>
>> Shall we grow one again?
>
> What's wrong with the rfe type? Why does it have to be a keyword?
It must have changed since I last looked at a feature request on the
tracker - using a type rather than keyword i
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 8:40 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > What's wrong with the rfe type? Why does it have to be a keyword?
>
> For one it's the name. Personally I didn't know the meaning of RFE until
> I googled it.
>
I agree, the name is a bit con
20 matches
Mail list logo
