Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 22:37, wrote: > >Antoine> Then we would need a whole array of checkboxes for things >Antoine> missing in a patch: >Antoine> - missing unit test >Antoine> - missing documentation changes >Antoine> - other things? > > How about replacing all the possibili

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 6:37 AM, wrote: > How about replacing all the possibilities with > >    patch incomplete > > then elaborate in the issue itself how that is the case. +1 This is much clearer than lumping incomplete patches in with nonexistent ones. A process that goes "needs patch->patch

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3333: wsgi_string() function

Ian Bicking writes: > On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull > wrote: > > > Robert Brewer writes: > > > > > Python 3.1 was released June 27th, 2009. We're coming up faster on the > > > two-year period than we seem to be on a revised WSGI spec. Maybe we > > > should shoot f

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Point out that OS X users need to change examples to use python.exe instead of

In article , Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > On Jan 10, 2011, at 1:37 PM, ®©ukasz Langa wrote: > > I'm using the case-sensitive variant of HFS+ since 10.4. It works, I like > > it and you get ./python with it. > I realize that this isn't a popularity contest for this feature, but I feel > like I shou

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Point out that OS X users need to change examples to use python.exe instead of

On Jan 10, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Łukasz Langa wrote: > I'm using the case-sensitive variant of HFS+ since 10.4. It works, I like it > and you get ./python with it. I realize that this isn't a popularity contest for this feature, but I feel like I should pipe up here and mention that it breaks some

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] devguide: TODO about explaining how to fill in every field in an issue for a triager.

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 3:15 PM, brett.cannon wrote: .. > +.. todo:: > +    Figure out where to put instructions for triagers on filling out issue > +    fields properly Some field titles are clickable and linked to field choices descriptions. Maybe these could be replaced with links to proper d

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

Antoine> Then we would need a whole array of checkboxes for things Antoine> missing in a patch: Antoine> - missing unit test Antoine> - missing documentation changes Antoine> - other things? How about replacing all the possibilities with patch incomplete then elaborate i

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

On 10/01/2011 19:48, Alexander Belopolsky wrote: On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Éric Araujo wrote: +1 to rename it “test needed” +1 to remove it I meant either one would be an improvement. +1 to remove it Let's remove it first, an then decide if another stage is necessary. The problems wit

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Éric Araujo wrote: >>> +1 to rename it “test needed” >>> +1 to remove it > > I meant either one would be an improvement. +1 to remove it Let's remove it first, an then decide if another stage is necessary. The problems with "unit test needed" is that 1. It is no

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

Le lundi 10 janvier 2011 à 19:37 +, Michael Foord a écrit : > On 10/01/2011 19:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > Le lundi 10 janvier 2011 à 19:26 +, Michael Foord a écrit : > >>> > >>> Fair enough. I will remove it. > >>> > >> Well, *often* a test that exposes the issue can be written - and if

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

On 10/01/2011 19:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Le lundi 10 janvier 2011 à 19:26 +, Michael Foord a écrit : Fair enough. I will remove it. Well, *often* a test that exposes the issue can be written - and if so it is a useful exercise (surely). Yes, well, that's a matter of "useful exercise fo

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

Le lundi 10 janvier 2011 à 19:26 +, Michael Foord a écrit : > > > > > > Fair enough. I will remove it. > > > > Well, *often* a test that exposes the issue can be written - and if so > it is a useful exercise (surely). Yes, well, that's a matter of "useful exercise for the contributor" vs.

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 21:11:23 +0200 Eli Bendersky wrote: > > I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test > > needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers > > into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from > > contributors and bug reporters.

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

Le 10/01/2011 20:11, Eli Bendersky a écrit : > Perhaps a different wording would be preferred to removal. Suppose a > reviewer accepts a patch but asks for a test before committing it. Well, we usually forewarn that a patch should include tests and docs, so I think “patch needed” or “patch review”

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

On 10/01/2011 19:05, Brett Cannon wrote: On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:24, Antoine Pitrou > wrote: On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 15:18:12 -0800 Brett Cannon mailto:br...@python.org>> wrote: > > OK, so the sentence is poorly phrased, but in the list of tasks i

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

> I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test > needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers > into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from > contributors and bug reporters. > > Perhaps a different wording would be preferred to removal. Su

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 10:24, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 15:18:12 -0800 > Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > OK, so the sentence is poorly phrased, but in the list of tasks it is > > labeled explicitly as intermediate when one is comfortable with the > > process, not a newbie. Does tha

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Point out that OS X users need to change examples to use python.exe instead of

Wiadomość napisana przez Ned Deily w dniu 2011-01-08, o godz. 22:13: > In article > , > Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 13:04, Ned Deily wrote: >>> In article , >>> >>> That's true on OS X if you are using a case-insensitive file system. >>> But wIth the newer, case-sensitive

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

>> +1 to rename it “test needed” >> +1 to remove it I meant either one would be an improvement. Regards ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/op

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

Am 10.01.2011 19:21, schrieb Éric Araujo: >> I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test >> needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers >> into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from >> contributors and bug reporters. > > Speaking as a

Re: [Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

> I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test > needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers > into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from > contributors and bug reporters. Speaking as a bug triager: +1 to rename it “test needed” +1 to r

Re: [Python-Dev] devguide: Add an intermediate task of helping triage issues (not to be confused with the

On Sun, 9 Jan 2011 15:18:12 -0800 Brett Cannon wrote: > > OK, so the sentence is poorly phrased, but in the list of tasks it is > labeled explicitly as intermediate when one is comfortable with the > process, not a newbie. Does that alleviate the worry you both have? It does seem to alleviate it

[Python-Dev] "unit test needed"

Hello, I would like to advocate again for the removal of the "unit test needed" stage on the tracker, which regularly confuses our triagers into thinking it's an actual requirement or expectation from contributors and bug reporters. Regards Antoine. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3333: wsgi_string() function

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Ian Bicking wrote: > > The kind of object PJE was referring to is more like Ruby's strings, which > do not embed the encoding inside the bytes themselves but have the encoding > as a kind of annotation on the bytes, and do lazy transcoding when combining > strings

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3333: wsgi_string() function

On 10/01/2011 17:24, Ian Bicking wrote: On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull mailto:step...@xemacs.org>> wrote: Robert Brewer writes: > Python 3.1 was released June 27th, 2009. We're coming up faster on the > two-year period than we seem to be on a revised WSGI s

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3333: wsgi_string() function

On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Robert Brewer writes: > > > Python 3.1 was released June 27th, 2009. We're coming up faster on the > > two-year period than we seem to be on a revised WSGI spec. Maybe we > > should shoot for a "bytes of a known encoding" type first.