On 31 May 2015 at 08:37, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with
>> at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them
>> (e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new
>> platforms). Instituti
On 31 May 2015 at 09:20, Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>
> Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the disadvantage
> of cutting into a compelling business case for users to move forward to
> python 3.[1] so doing this has a cost to pyth
Nick Coghlan wrote:
We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with
at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them
(e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new
platforms). Institutions with a clear financial interest in a
particular probl
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
> The buildbots currently live in a state of denial about the 3.5 branch.
> Could someone whisper tenderly in their collective shell-like ears so that
> they start building 3.5, in addition to 3.4 and trunk?
The 3.5 branch seems to be set up
On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the
disadvantage of cutting into a compelling business case for users to
move forward to python 3.[1] so doing this has a cost to python 3
adoption. But, the question is whether there i
On 31 May 2015 04:20, "Ludovic Gasc" wrote:
>
> For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read
most of the e-mails.
> However, this thread seems to be "infected": I can smell from here your
emotions behind your words.
>
> Why to push a lot of emotions inside a technical di
For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read
most of the e-mails.
However, this thread seems to be "infected": I can smell from here your
emotions behind your words.
Why to push a lot of emotions inside a technical discussion ?
What's the nerves have been hit with this d
On May 30, 2015, at 06:55 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>Intel are looking to get involved in CPython core development
>*specifically* to work on performance improvements, so it's important
>to offer folks in the community good reasons for why we're OK with
>seeing at least some of that work applied to
On May 30, 2015 1:56 AM, "Nick Coghlan" wrote:
>
> Being ready, willing and able to handle the kind of situation created
> by the Python 2->3 community transition is a large part of what it
> means to offer commercial support for community driven open source
> projects, as it buys customers' time
Hi Christian,
> Antoine,
>
> now your are putting it over the top. You make it sound like I'm some
> crazy environmentalist or eco-warrior. Well, I'm not.
I apologize for misrepresenting your position.
I still don't think discussing environmental matters is really
productive here, though :-)
R
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> > In a community of volunteers, ideology is typically a great
> > motivator.
>
> If and only everyone agrees on it.
That, my friend, is *your* ideology speaking. Some people work on
open source to scratch technical itches -- the program doesn't do what
they want, th
Who said anything about funding? this is a thread about the patch Intel
offered (and had committed).
And that's the point. This is the thread about THAT patch. Why are we
hijacking this topic for an environmental debate? If it is a legitimate
topic (which it might be), discuss it in its ow
On 30 May 2015 at 21:37, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate
>> contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to
>> a concrete proposal for such ongoing contributions ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2015-05-30 14:03, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> No, it's up to the proponent to prove that the effect exists, with
> a magnitude large enough to make any interesting difference. That's
> part of the process when suggesting a change.
>
> If it doesn't,
Le 30/05/2015 13:51, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
> Antoine Pitrou writes:
> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
> > Christian Heimes wrote:
> > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
> > > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power
> >
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
> Christian Heimes wrote:
> > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
> > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power
> > consumption. Python runs of hundreds of thousands of machines
On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate
> contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to
> a concrete proposal for such ongoing contributions has been both
> incredibly surprising *and* disappointing
On 30 May 2015 at 20:58, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote:
>> >
>> > Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
>> > opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that mu
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core
>> run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I
>> wouldn't pay money for it on the
On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000
Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core
> run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I
> wouldn't pay money for it on the sole basis of expecting to make that
> back in reduced electri
On 30 May 2015 at 20:35, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
>> > Christian Heimes wrote:
>> > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibil
On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote:
> >
> > Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
> > opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care
> > about improving python to
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
>> > Christian Heimes wrote:
>> > > For performance patches we have to consider our res
On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
> > Christian Heimes wrote:
> > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
> > > environment. Every improvement means mo
On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote:
>
> Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
> opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care
> about improving python to do less environmental damage, then that is a
> discussion we sho
Isn't it a time to assign release manager for 3.6-3.7?
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
26 matches
Mail list logo
