On 06/19/2016 03:51 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I think it's fine to have this SIG. I could see it going different ways
in terms of discussions and membership, but it's definitely worth a try.
I don't like clever names, and I very much doubt that it'll be mistaken
for an address to report sensit
On 19/06/16 18:29, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 at 21:49 Guido van Rossum mailto:gu...@python.org>> wrote:
Hi Brett,
I've got a few questions about the specific design. Probably you
know the answers, it would be nice to have them in the PEP.
Once you're happy with m
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 at 21:49 Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> Hi Brett,
>>
>> I've got a few questions about the specific design. Probably you know the
>> answers, it would be nice to have them in the PEP.
>>
>
> Once you're happy with my an
On 2016-06-20 02:29, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 at 21:49 Guido van Rossum mailto:gu...@python.org>> wrote:
[snip]
Could you figure out some other way to store per-code-object data?
It seems you considered this but decided that the co_extra field was
simpler and faste
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 at 21:49 Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Hi Brett,
>
> I've got a few questions about the specific design. Probably you know the
> answers, it would be nice to have them in the PEP.
>
Once you're happy with my answers I'll update the PEP.
>
> First, why not have a global hook? Wh
I think it's fine to have this SIG. I could see it going different ways in
terms of discussions and membership, but it's definitely worth a try. I
don't like clever names, and I very much doubt that it'll be mistaken for
an address to report sensitive issues, so I think it should just be
security-s
On 06/19/2016 12:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 18 June 2016 at 10:36, Ethan Furman wrote:
To sum up: I think it would be a good idea.
I'm coming around to this point of view as well. import-sig, for
example, is a very low traffic SIG, but I think it serves three key
useful purposes:
- it c
On 18 June 2016 at 10:36, Ethan Furman wrote:
> One of the big advantages of a SIG is the much reduced pool of participants,
> and that those participants are usually interested in forward progress. It
> would also be helpful to have a single person both champion and act as
> buffer for the propo
Hi Nick,
On 6/17/16, 6:12 PM, "Nick Coghlan" wrote:
>On 16 June 2016 at 19:00, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>> Hi Guido,
>>
>> From: on behalf of Guido van Rossum
>>
>> Reply-To:
>> Date: Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 5:27 PM
>> To: Kevin Ollivier
>> Cc: Python Dev
>> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Dis
