After reading all this, I really don't believe that adding egg
support to the stdlib at this time is the right thing to do. I am
therefore rejecting the PEP.
I am hoping that someone will create a simpler bootstrap module that
is able to download a file of pure Python code and install it, perhaps
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2008, at 11:35 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > What do I do for something that should absolutely go into the 2.6final
> > release (say) but is otherwise pretty minor? I've been using critical
> > to make s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 17, 2008, at 11:35 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> What do I do for something that should absolutely go into the 2.6final
> release (say) but is otherwise pretty minor? I've been using critical
> to make sure it doesn't get put off until past the
What do I do for something that should absolutely go into the 2.6final
release (say) but is otherwise pretty minor? I've been using critical
to make sure it doesn't get put off until past the release.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 9:10 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Barry, Neal, and myself had a conversation and changed the priority
> fields in the tracker. You can click on 'priority' to see an
> explanation, but the new fields are:
>
> - release blocker
> - critical
> - high
> -
Barry, Neal, and myself had a conversation and changed the priority
fields in the tracker. You can click on 'priority' to see an
explanation, but the new fields are:
- release blocker
- critical
- high
- normal
- low
So "release blocker" blocks a release. "Critical" could very easily
block a rele
Now I apparently need an email reader that understands reStructuredText :-).
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive
I'm the maintainer of a few Python packages which wrap native C or C+
+ code.
At Pycon, I learned that PyPy and Jython support ctypes or have plans
to do so in the near future. I don't know about IronPython.
However, having CPython, PyPy, and Jython all supporting ctypes makes
it the obviou
Greetings from Pycon 2008!
Neal Norwitz and I have worked out the schedule for Python 2.6 and
3.0, which will be released in lockstep. We will be following a
monthly release schedule, with releases to occur on the first
Wednesday of the month. We'll move to a 2 week schedule for the
rel
Hi everyone,
I happily like to report, that xturtle is running under Python 2.6
seemingly without any problems.
Thanks to Paul Moore's advice I could get Python 2.6 running on
my windows machine.
I tested xturtle running those 30+ sample scripts, which are contained in
the xturtle package with t
At 05:10 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
>packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
>
>The BoF drew about 15 people, many of whom were packagers for Red Hat, Ubuntu
>and such. Everyone
For those who don't read blogs, I just blogged the slides for my
keynote, and added an important admonishment to 3rd party developers.
Here's the full text of the blog:
The slides of my `keynote`_ are now up on python.org. There's both a
`PowerPoint`_ and a `PDF`_ file.
.. _keynote: http://www.p
Paul Moore schrieb:
> On 17/03/2008, Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> When doing the same call to execute idle as you, I got the following:
>>
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File "c:\Python26\Lib\idlelib\idle.py", line 6, in
>> import PyShell
>> File "c:\Python26\Li
Oleg Broytmann phd.pp.ru> writes:
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 06:35:46PM -0400, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> > class x:
> > pass
> > class y(x):
> > pass
> > try:
> > raise y
> > except y:
> > print "a"
> > except:
> > print "b"
> >
> > It prints 'b'.
>
>Python 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5
On 17/03/2008, Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When doing the same call to execute idle as you, I got the following:
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "c:\Python26\Lib\idlelib\idle.py", line 6, in
> import PyShell
> File "c:\Python26\Lib\idlelib\PyShell.py", line 9,
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 07:18:25PM -0400, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> I don't have my PowerBook here, but I am sure I've seen in on Mac OS
> too. Only new-style class behavior is problematic. The following
> code prints 'b' for me:
>
> __metaclass__ = type
Ah, yes - with this addition it
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
..
> Really? Under which version exactly? On which platform? I cannot
> reproduce this with either 2.4, 2.5 or 2.6 on OS X.
Just retested in
Python 2.6a1+ (trunk:61449M, Mar 17 2008, 17:29:21)
[GCC 3.4.6 20060404 (Red
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 06:35:46PM -0400, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> class x:
> pass
> class y(x):
> pass
> try:
> raise y
> except y:
> print "a"
> except:
> print "b"
>
> It prints 'b'.
Python 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 on Linux: prints 'a'.
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmannhttp:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Alexander Belopolsky
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While discussing issue2291, I presented the following argument:
>
> """
> Consider the following code:
>
> class x:
> pass
> class y(x):
> pass
> try:
> raise y
> except y:
> print "a"
> ex
While discussing issue2291, I presented the following argument:
"""
Consider the following code:
class x:
pass
class y(x):
pass
try:
raise y
except y:
print "a"
except:
print "b"
It prints 'b'. Now, suppose in preparation for 3.0 transition someone
adds "__metaclass__ = type" to the module
Hi Paul,
thanks for you efforts, but up to now it still didn't work.
I'm using Windows XP Professional (32 bit).
I tried an install on two different machines with the same negative result.
I proceeded like you suggested.
- I installed for all users,
- I disabled the register extensions
When doi
I was in a Packaging BoF yesterday and, although not very relevant to the
packager bootstrap thread, Guido has asked me to post some of the concerns.
The BoF drew about 15 people, many of whom were packagers for Red Hat, Ubuntu
and such. Everyone had strong expressions of frustration with the s
On 17/03/2008, Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> as you probably can imagine, I'd like to try out xturtle.py with Python 2.6
> Alas, I didn't succeed installing Python 2.6 correctly on my Windows
> machine using the Windows msi installer.
>
> Whereas I could start the python interprete
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Brett Cannon schrieb:
> > ...
>
> > The current plan is to introduce a tk package and turtle was to become
> > tk.turtle. xturtle, if picked up, can just take the place of the
> > current turtle at that location.
>
Brett Cannon schrieb:
> ...
> The current plan is to introduce a tk package and turtle was to become
> tk.turtle. xturtle, if picked up, can just take the place of the
> current turtle at that location.
>
> -Brett
>
Hi Brett,
as you probably can imagine, I'd like to try out xturtle.py with Py
On 17/03/2008, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That leaves MAL, whose objections to PEP 365 centered on the API (he
> said he was "+1 on the concepts being added to the stdlib, -1 on
> adding the module in its current state"). Among other concerns, he
> wanted pkg_resources to be s
At 02:44 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Jeff Rush wrote:
>Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm +lots on someone giving a clear explanation of the meaning and
> >> interrelationship of the various terms involved in this discussion
>
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm +lots on someone giving a clear explanation of the meaning and
>> interrelationship of the various terms involved in this discussion
>> (setuptools, easy_install, pkg_resources, eggs, "pac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 17, 2008, at 12:28 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Right now at the sprint I am going through a list of issues Neal and I
> compiled of what needs to happen to get 2.6/3.0 out the door (although
> the list is pretty much 2.6-specific). They are all b
At 01:59 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>I have certainly personally encountered plenty of situations where I
>wasn't able to complete an egg-based install because some dependency
>was broken (e.g. not available for the Python version I was using).
That's odd -- setuptools-based insta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> At 10:53 AM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> >I don't think this should play games with scripts being overridden or
>> >whatever. If a
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:59 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Phillip J. Eby
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > At 12:17 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > >There will be no
At 12:59 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Phillip J. Eby
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 12:17 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > >There will be no egg support in the standard library.
> >
> > Are there any qualifications on that stat
Brett Cannon schrieb:
> Right now at the sprint I am going through a list of issues Neal and I
> compiled of what needs to happen to get 2.6/3.0 out the door (although
> the list is pretty much 2.6-specific). They are all being flagged as
> "immediate" priority. Hopefully it won't take too long to
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Great!
>
> I wonder though if these should really all be given "showstopper"
> priority. IMO things don't reach showstopper status until they are
> blocking the next release (alpha, beta or final).
>
Fine by me. If
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:17 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >There will be no egg support in the standard library.
>
> Are there any qualifications on that statement, or is this in the
> same category as "from __future__ im
> But I don't see any practical difference with including setuptools and
> including a module that installs setuptools. Would you be happy with
> the standard library including a module whose sole function was to
> install a package that you weren't happy to include directly in the
> standard libra
On 17/03/2008, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Stefan Behnel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is it *wanted* that eggs are being supported by core Python?
>
> No. There will be no egg support in the standard library.
This bothers me somewhat. At a cer
At 12:17 PM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>There will be no egg support in the standard library.
Are there any qualifications on that statement, or is this in the
same category as "from __future__ import braces"?
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Great!
I wonder though if these should really all be given "showstopper"
priority. IMO things don't reach showstopper status until they are
blocking the next release (alpha, beta or final).
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right now at the sprint I am go
Right now at the sprint I am going through a list of issues Neal and I
compiled of what needs to happen to get 2.6/3.0 out the door (although
the list is pretty much 2.6-specific). They are all being flagged as
"immediate" priority. Hopefully it won't take too long to add all of
them (although the
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I don't see any practical difference with including setuptools and
> including a module that installs setuptools. Would you be happy with
> the standard library including a module whose sole function was to
> install
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Stefan Behnel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > It should be able to download a Python-only module or package and
> > install it into site-packages (or perhaps elsewhere if so directed via
> > another optional command line flag). It should
On 17/03/2008, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Personally, I have no problem per se with including setuptools in the
> > stdlib. Maybe that means I miss the subtle benefit of this approach...
>
> Did you review setuptools and can vouch that it is written cleanly,
> follows the codi
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> It should be able to download a Python-only module or package and
> install it into site-packages (or perhaps elsewhere if so directed via
> another optional command line flag). It should support zip, tar and
> tar.gz/tgz files (and perhaps tar.bz2). It should simply unpac
> I'm puzzled. We seem to be talking about adding a module to the stdlib
> whose basic function is to download and install setuptools? How is
> this better than just including setuptools in the stdlib?
I can do a review of such a module in an hour. To review setuptools
(which I would have to do if
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17/03/2008, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >The PEP suggests that other package managers also benefit. How do they
> > >benefit if the bootstrap script installs setuptools?
> >
> > Because those other pa
On 17/03/2008, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >The PEP suggests that other package managers also benefit. How do they
> >benefit if the bootstrap script installs setuptools?
>
> Because those other package managers depend, in fact, on setuptools,
> or at least pkg_resources... which w
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:53 AM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >I don't think this should play games with scripts being overridden or
> >whatever. If a bootstrap script is to be installed it should have a
> >separate name. I'm
At 10:53 AM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>I don't think this should play games with scripts being overridden or
>whatever. If a bootstrap script is to be installed it should have a
>separate name. I'm not sure what the advantage is of a bootstrap
>script over "python -m bootstrap_module
I don't think this should play games with scripts being overridden or
whatever. If a bootstrap script is to be installed it should have a
separate name. I'm not sure what the advantage is of a bootstrap
script over "python -m bootstrap_module ..." though.
The PEP suggests that other package manage
>> I thought the original proposal was to install a *binary* easy_install
>> that takes that function.
>
> What do you mean by "binary"? I thought we were talking about a
> module. Do you mean a script to be installed alongside Python itself in
> e.g. /usr/bin?
Exactly so.
> In the original
At 09:45 AM 3/17/2008 -0500, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > Well, it might be replaced by a protracted discussion of how the
> > module should work and what its API should be, but perhaps that would
> > be a better one to have. :)
>
>Indeed, that's likely to happen :-)
>
> > So, the original proposal
> Well, it might be replaced by a protracted discussion of how the
> module should work and what its API should be, but perhaps that would
> be a better one to have. :)
Indeed, that's likely to happen :-)
> So, the original proposal (from the previous thread about this) was
> that the module
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mar 16, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> 'critical' is fine (or 'immediate'). My problem before was that I
> couldn't do one query that gave me all the critical issues for both
> 2.6 and 3.0. That certainly could have been pebkac though.
At 08:48 AM 3/17/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, if the consensus is that it would be better to have a module that
> > only does bootstrap installs of pure-Python eggs from PyPI, I'm
> > totally fine with tha
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, if the consensus is that it would be better to have a module that
> only does bootstrap installs of pure-Python eggs from PyPI, I'm
> totally fine with that.
Let's just do this; it will avoid a protracted discussio
57 matches
Mail list logo
