2009/8/21 Ben Finney :
> Howdy all,
>
> What is the procedure for finding out why an issue hasn't progressed? I
> don't want to fill the bug database with such noise.
In this case, it's probably because no one officially maintains the
shlex module at the moment.
>
> In the case of http://bugs.pyt
On 22/08/2009 2:46 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Mark Hammond writes:
> Something like ~/.hgrules having:
Surely you mean $PROJECTROOT/.hgrules?
Indeed.
> [config] # or maybe [rules] ?
> required_extensions = win32text, some_pydev_specific_extension
[extensions]
required_for_com
Mark Hammond writes:
> Something like ~/.hgrules having:
Surely you mean $PROJECTROOT/.hgrules?
> [config] # or maybe [rules] ?
> required_extensions = win32text, some_pydev_specific_extension
[extensions]
required_for_commit = win32text,some_other_ext
That might require a change to hg's i
On 22/08/2009 12:10 AM, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Mark Hammond wrote:
Maybe you can enumerate what you think needs to change in mercurial, then
once we have a plan in place it will be clearer who can do what.
The encode/decode hooks need to be passed the filename th
On 22/08/2009 12:19 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 16:10, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
I like this, though maybe .hgextensions since it would contain
versioned rules and the actual required extension. The extra sub
directories are not really required IMHO, you just have a hgrc file
t
Howdy all,
What is the procedure for finding out why an issue hasn't progressed? I
don't want to fill the bug database with such noise.
In the case of http://bugs.python.org/issue1170> (“shlex have
problems with parsing unicode”), the problem is apparently addressed by
a patch, assigned to that i
Dj Gilcrease writes:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>> Enabling extensions in a versioned file is not going to fly.
>
> any specific reason?
In the general case, you can specify an extension to be enabled by
filename:
[extensions]
foo = ~/src/foo
So if I can enab
Peter Moody wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>> I was surprised that IP('172.16.1.1') returned
>> IPv4Address('172.16.1.1/32') instead of IPv4Address('172.16.1.1'). I
>> know I can change the behavior by using host=True, but then
>> IP('172.16.1.1/24', host=True) wil
Peter Moody wrote:
this is a good idea and I'll implement this. .iterhosts() for subnet
> - (network|broadcast) and .iterallhosts() for the entire subnet (in my
> testing, looping over an iterator was actually reasonably faster than
> just for i in IP(network):, so I'll support iterators for both
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Case Vanhorsen wrote:
>>On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Peter Moody wrote:
>> The pep has been updated with the excellent suggestions thus far.
>>
>> Are there any more?
>
> Thanks for writing the PEP.
>
> I tried a few of the common scenarios that I use at work.
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (08/14/09 - 08/21/09)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
2353 open (+40) / 16226 closed (+15) / 18579 total (+55)
Open issues with patches: 928
Average
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> Enabling extensions in a versioned file is not going to fly.
any specific reason?
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 16:10, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
> I like this, though maybe .hgextensions since it would contain
> versioned rules and the actual required extension. The extra sub
> directories are not really required IMHO, you just have a hgrc file
> that works the same as the local hgrc file e
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Mark Hammond wrote:
> Maybe you can enumerate what you think needs to change in mercurial, then
> once we have a plan in place it will be clearer who can do what.
The encode/decode hooks need to be passed the filename they are
working on so you can have an ignore l
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:11 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> Couldn't you just generate a check function for your tree that
> would be invoked before you try to process a tree that a
> script got access to?
That would be one way, though now that I understand CPython's AST
design better, I am tempted
Nick Coghlan writes:
> Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > Note that Bazaar is currently discussing some similar policies. I
> > think the name they have settled on is ".bzrrules". Maybe .hgrules is
> > a better name.
>
> So it would be .hgrules/? With the extension then
> defining the content
-On [20090820 20:19], Peter Moody (pe...@hda3.com) wrote:
>I've updated the pep with lots of examples; most of the stuff you're
>asking for is already supported, I just didn't do a good job
>explaining it. A few things are pending review.
Thanks for that Peter!
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
http://ipaddr-py.googlecode.com/svn/branches/2.0.x/ipaddr.py
> _compat_has_real_bytes = bytes != str
Wouldn't it be nicer "bytes is not str"?
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmannhttp://phd.pp.ru/p...@phd.pp.ru
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETU
Joel Bender wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> Maybe this is something that differs by country, but I have *never*
>> heard the first address in an IP network (i.e. every bit not covered by
>> the netmask set to zero) referred to as anything other than the "network
>> address".
>
> Ah! A change t
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Note that Bazaar is currently discussing some similar policies. I
> think the name they have settled on is ".bzrrules". Maybe .hgrules is
> a better name.
So it would be .hgrules/? With the extension then
defining the contents of the rule file?
An alternative would
Mark Hammond writes:
> * Add support for versioned 'filter rules' - eg, /.hgfilters or similar.
>
> * This might be pushing my luck, but: add 'defensive' support to core hg
> for this feature - if /.hgfilters exists, hg should refuse to operate on
> the working tree unless the win32text ex
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:16, Mark Hammond wrote:
> I'm resurrecting my patch to support a filter called 'none' (which is
> turning out to be harder than I thought). Off the top of my head, it would
> the following would give us a pretty solid solution:
>
> * Finish my patch for 'none' as a filte
[Adjusted the CCs...]
On 19/08/2009 8:21 AM, Dj Gilcrease wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 2:12 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
The second item is line conversion hooks. Dj Gilcrease has posted a
solution which he considers a hack himself. Mark Hammond has also
volunteered, but it seems some volunt
23 matches
Mail list logo
