On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:51:14 -0800, Guido van Rossum
wrote:
> Please mail me topics you'd like to hear me talk about in my keynote
> at PyCon this year.
As a typical (but perphaps more vocal) python developer I would
like to hear things that might aspire me and others to move to
python 3.
The w
2010/1/18 R. David Murray :
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:56:05 -0500, "Steve Steiner (listsin)"
> wrote:
>> As much of a pain as it is to get new modules accepted, I agree that
>> mixing archiving functions into shutil is not the right way to do it
>> and that a separate archive_util module would mak
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:56:05 -0500, "Steve Steiner (listsin)"
wrote:
> As much of a pain as it is to get new modules accepted, I agree that
> mixing archiving functions into shutil is not the right way to do it
> and that a separate archive_util module would make much more sense and
> would give
On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Masklinn wrote:
> On 18 Jan 2010, at 13:40 , Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>>> There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip module
>>> is not found, but I am happy to remove it and throw an exception if
>>> it's not found, and keep the
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Masklinn wrote:
[..]
>> Well - isn't what's being proposed "a number of high-level operations on
>> files and collections of files." ?
>>
> Well no those are high-level operations on a very restricted set of file
> types (archives)
not really: make_archive/unpac
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 02:34:14PM +0100, Masklinn wrote:
> Isn't it a bit weird to include that to shutil though? shutil advertises
> itself as "a number of high-level operations on files and collections of
> files." and from what I understood it was a bunch of shell-type utility
> functions to
On 18 Jan 2010, at 14:57 , Michael Foord wrote:
>
> On 18/01/2010 13:46, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Masklinn wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 Jan 2010, at 13:40 , Nick Coghlan wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Michael Foord
wrote:
[..]
>>> Wouldn't it make more sense to put those "archive utils"
>>> functions/objects in a new module separate from shutil, dealing specifically
>>> with cross-archive APIs and linked from the current archive-specific modules
>>> (essentially
On 18/01/2010 13:46, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Masklinn wrote:
On 18 Jan 2010, at 13:40 , Nick Coghlan wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip module
is not found, but I am happy to remove it and throw an exception if
i
On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:34 AM, Masklinn wrote:
On 18 Jan 2010, at 13:40 , Nick Coghlan wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip module
is not found, but I am happy to remove it and throw an exception if
it's not found, and keep the external "zip"
On 18 Jan 2010, at 13:40 , Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip module
>> is not found, but I am happy to remove it and throw an exception if
>> it's not found, and keep the external "zip" call on Distutils side, so
>> shutil s
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> There's one remaining external call for "zip" done if the zip module
> is not found, but I am happy to remove it and throw an exception if
> it's not found, and keep the external "zip" call on Distutils side, so
> shutil stays 100% stdlib-powered.
+1 for that approach. These c
12 matches
Mail list logo
