Setting up a repo with the code and cleaning a bit here and there.
Over the weekend I can put something useable.
Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 4 September 2014 18:50, A. Cavallo wrote:
Yes there are "details" indeed. But not show stoppers. A prototype can be
seen here: http://cclimited.webfactional
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 12:06:25 +0200
Jonas Wagner wrote:
>
> One additional issue appeared, though: it seems that extension modules are
> always built sequentially no matter what the value of MAKEFLAGS is. I've
> seen that these are being built by a custom setup.py script. Do you think
> it would be
Hi,
Thanks for your comments! I've done more tests on a new machine and, for
better or worse, was no longer able to reproduce the issue. Parallel
compilation now works fine; I'll keep collecting output from make, and
would post it here if the problem appears again.
One additional issue appeared,
And so what would need to be done to rectify this problem? If there are no
objections, I would like to resolve this particular point, at least until
better people can be found to do so.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:50 PM, A. Cavallo wrote:
> Yes there are "details" indeed. But not show stoppers. A
>
> The limiting factor is generally time - various aspects of the current
> system are clumsy, but they work, so unless someone is particularly
> keen and willing to work through all the factors that led to the
> current setup and propose changes (including at least a rough concept
> of how ongoin
Also, have you considered using Travis? It would allow us to add to the
configurations, at least generally...
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 4 September 2014 11:07, Antonio Cavallo
> wrote:
> > I wonder if there is any interest in starting to use the opensuse build
>
On 4 September 2014 22:39, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:11:38 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> That leaves Python 2.7, and I have to say I'm now persuaded that a
>> backport (including any required httplib and urllib features) is the
>> right way to go. One of the tasks I'd been dr
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 13:11:38 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> That leaves Python 2.7, and I have to say I'm now persuaded that a
> backport (including any required httplib and urllib features) is the
> right way to go. One of the tasks I'd been dreading as a follow-on
> from PEP 466 was organising the c
On 4 September 2014 18:50, A. Cavallo wrote:
> Yes there are "details" indeed. But not show stoppers. A prototype can be
> seen here: http://cclimited.webfactional.com
> The nice bit is testing will be executed in a total fresh instance, an added
> bonus
Oh, very nice!
What is needed to get that
Yes there are "details" indeed. But not show stoppers. A prototype can be seen
here: http://cclimited.webfactional.com
The nice bit is testing will be executed in a total fresh instance, an added
bonus
On 4 September 2014 05:16:01 GMT+01:00, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>On 4 September 2014 11:07, Ant
On 4 September 2014 16:59, Shorya Raj wrote:
>> The limiting factor is generally time - various aspects of the current
>> system are clumsy, but they work, so unless someone is particularly
>> keen and willing to work through all the factors that led to the
>> current setup and propose changes (in
11 matches
Mail list logo
