Matthieu,
>> I'd be happy to see bzr and mercurial and git all made it together
>> into the stdlib for python 3. That would give a superb updating
>> mechanism for python that would propel python well beyond
>> the dinosaur badlands of CPAN and other languages.
>
> I think there are several point
> I'd be happy to see bzr and mercurial and git all made it together
> into the stdlib for python 3. That would give a superb updating
> mechanism for python that would propel python well beyond
> the dinosaur badlands of CPAN and other languages.
I think there are several points that make them no
"David Lyon" writes:
> Well using that logic, distutils is an application..
Distutils is an application, the function of which is essential to
allowing sane development of Python packages. It's a special case. We
need to strictly limit the number of special cases, not gleefully add to
them.
--
Barry Warsaw writes:
> On Jan 20, 2010, at 03:29 PM, David Lyon wrote:
> >So here I am as a user doing things the 'right' way.
>
> Actually, you're not. It's not up to the Python community to initiate
> this. If you really want this, you should engage with the relevant
> DVCS communities and push
> "David Lyon" writes:
>
>> Being honest, if wonderful libraries like Sphinx and Mercurial and Git
>> and BZR can't make it into the stdlib, then there is no hope for even
>> newer code to get in there.
>
> Those are applications, not libraries. Applications don't belong in the
> standard library.
Okay, last follow up on this and then I'm going to bed. :)
On Jan 20, 2010, at 03:29 PM, David Lyon wrote:
>> On Jan 19, 2010, at 08:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> I'd be surprised if any of the big 3 DVCS developers would actually /want/
>> their stuff in the stdlib.
>
>If they ask, they'll ge
> On Jan 19, 2010, at 08:09 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> I'd be surprised if any of the big 3 DVCS developers would actually /want/
> their stuff in the stdlib.
If they ask, they'll get told they're motorbike-shedding. "It's better
if their users ask". So here I am as a user doing things the 'right
On Jan 20, 2010, at 02:43 PM, David Lyon wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>> A SCM is not a "package management system".
>
>Exactly. It almost makes the need for a "package management system"
>pretty much obsolete if you can update your code directly from
>the develo
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 21:43, David Lyon wrote:
>
> Being honest, if wonderful libraries like Sphinx and Mercurial
> and Git and BZR can't make it into the stdlib, then there is
> no hope for even newer code to get in there.
>
I'm not entirely sure I see why the inclusion of a SCM into the stdl
"David Lyon" writes:
> Being honest, if wonderful libraries like Sphinx and Mercurial and Git
> and BZR can't make it into the stdlib, then there is no hope for even
> newer code to get in there.
Those are applications, not libraries. Applications don't belong in the
standard library.
--
\
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:43 PM, David Lyon wrote:
[snip]
> Being honest, if wonderful libraries like Sphinx and Mercurial
> and Git and BZR can't make it into the stdlib, then there is
> no hope for even newer code to get in there.
Did you ever stop to think that some package authors do not wan
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
> Python 3 is still modularized, still has a standard library, etc. If
> you're really interested in helping with the standard library, get on
> stdlib-sig, and get ready to write code and PEPs.
Thank you for your direction to move these ite
On Jan 19, 2010, at 08:09 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>The decision to move python's source control from SVN to mercurial was
>controversial enough; including 3 or more scm libraries into core
>would be an intractable uphill mountain of bike sheds.
I'd be surprised if any of the big 3 DVCS developers
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:51 PM, David Lyon wrote:
>> On Jan 20, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Barry wrote:
>
>>> So does that mean we could update the stdlib for a given
>>> python version using this ?
>>
>> In a sense, yes (if I understand your question correctly).
>
> Yeah, it just needs an implementation
> On Jan 20, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Barry wrote:
>> So does that mean we could update the stdlib for a given
>> python version using this ?
>
> In a sense, yes (if I understand your question correctly).
Yeah, it just needs an implementation.
> The one thing I am unsure about, mostly because I have n
On Jan 20, 2010, at 10:16 AM, David Lyon wrote:
>Hi Barry,
>
>That looks very interesting...
Hi David,
>So does that mean we could update the stdlib for a given
>python version using this ?
In a sense, yes (if I understand your question correctly).
You can use Bazaar to branch any of the 4 Pyt
Hi Barry,
That looks very interesting...
So does that mean we could update the stdlib for a given
python version using this ?
David
> I've just updated the Launchpad mirrors for the 4 active Python branches,
> trunk, py3k, 2.6, and 3.1. These used to mirror the defunct Bazaar
> branches
> on
R. David Murray wrote:
> The Python issue tracker does, for one.
And all the PEPs.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---
___
Python-Dev mailing
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 11:24:57 -0500, James Y Knight wrote:
>
> On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> > On Jan 19, 2010, at 03:50 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
> >
> >> When I look at the mailing list archive for python-dev, I see some
> >> odd stuff at the bottom of the page:
> >>
> >>
On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:24 AM, James Y Knight wrote:
>No doubt, you've now broken every link anyone had ever made into the
>python-dev archives, because now all the article numbers are
>different. BTDT...unfortunately... Pipermail really is quite crappy,
>sigh.
I've been trying for 10+ years
On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Jan 19, 2010, at 03:50 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
When I look at the mailing list archive for python-dev, I see some
odd stuff at
the bottom of the page:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-January/thread.html#95232
Anyone know
On Jan 19, 2010, at 03:50 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
>When I look at the mailing list archive for python-dev, I see some odd stuff at
>the bottom of the page:
>
>http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-January/thread.html#95232
>
>Anyone know what's happened?
WTF? I think the archives were
Hi,
When I look at the mailing list archive for python-dev, I see some odd stuff at
the bottom of the page:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-January/thread.html#95232
Anyone know what's happened?
Regards,
Vinay Sajip
___
Python-Dev m
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For 2.7/3.2, I am in the process of removing modules in Distutils that
> can be replaced by calls to existing functions in stdlib. For
> instance, "dir_util" and "file_util" (old modules from the Python 1.x
> era) are going away in
I've just updated the Launchpad mirrors for the 4 active Python branches,
trunk, py3k, 2.6, and 3.1. These used to mirror the defunct Bazaar branches
on code.python.org but it's probably been 7 months or so since those were
regularly updated. Now the Launchpad branches sync against the read-only
Paul Moore wrote:
> 2010/1/18 R. David Murray :
>> So +1 from me for putting these in shutil.
>
> Conceptually, I'm happy with these going into shutil (and +1 on the
> rest of Tarek's proposal, too!)
>
> To my mind, shutil is a module for higher-level operations on files -
> the sort of things yo
26 matches
Mail list logo
