Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round

2017-05-28 Thread Guido van Rossum
On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > On 28 May 2017 at 16:13, Kevin Conway wrote: > >> > Some of the possible options for the title are >> It seems like you're talking about something most other languages would >> refer to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round

2017-05-28 Thread Ivan Levkivskyi
On 28 May 2017 at 16:13, Kevin Conway wrote: > > Some of the possible options for the title are > It seems like you're talking about something most other languages would > refer to as "Interfaces". What is unique about this proposal that would > call for not using the

Re: [Python-Dev] Aligning the packaging.python.org theme with the rest of the docs

2017-05-28 Thread David Mertz
I agree with MAL and have also been on the Trademarks Committee for 8-9 years. Protecting an actual Mark like the logo is fine, as painful as it is to someone's say no to an attractive derived logo. But trying to protect a look-and-feel is way too far down the path of evil (it's what some

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round

2017-05-28 Thread Kevin Conway
> Some of the possible options for the title are It seems like you're talking about something most other languages would refer to as "Interfaces". What is unique about this proposal that would call for not using the industry standard language? > Type-hints should not have runtime semantics,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 544: Protocols - second round

2017-05-28 Thread Ivan Levkivskyi
Thanks everyone for interesting suggestions! @Antoine @Guido: Some of the possible options for the title are: * Protocols (structural subtyping) * Protocols (static duck typing) * Structural subtyping (static duck typing) which one do you prefer? @Nick: Yes, explicit imports are not necessary

Re: [Python-Dev] Aligning the packaging.python.org theme with the rest of the docs

2017-05-28 Thread M.-A. Lemburg
I'm -1 on going down the suggested route of Apple et al. for an open source language. We don't need more trademarks to "protect" ourselves against fellow open source projects. I see this whole trademark business that OSS projects are getting into in recent years in a more and more critical

Re: [Python-Dev] Aligning the packaging.python.org theme with the rest of the docs

2017-05-28 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sat, 27 May 2017 14:26:54 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > > Thoughts? Should we stick with pypa-theme as the name? Switch to > psf-docs-theme? Publish both, with pypa-theme adding PyPA specific > elements to a more general psf-docs-theme? > [...] > > Future requests to use

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 538 (review round 2): Coercing the legacy C locale to a UTF-8 based locale

2017-05-28 Thread Ethan Furman
On 05/27/2017 11:46 PM, INADA Naoki wrote: Now I approve the PEP 538. Thank you, Nick and Inada-san! -- ~Ethan~ ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe:

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 538 (review round 2): Coercing the legacy C locale to a UTF-8 based locale

2017-05-28 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 28 May 2017 at 16:46, INADA Naoki wrote: > Now I approve the PEP 538. > > It's side-effect (just set LC_CTYPE envvar) seems simple enough and > moderate enough. > > Locale coercion will save people from unwanted mojibake (escaped string) > and locale warning will

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 538 (review round 2): Coercing the legacy C locale to a UTF-8 based locale

2017-05-28 Thread INADA Naoki
Now I approve the PEP 538. It's side-effect (just set LC_CTYPE envvar) seems simple enough and moderate enough. Locale coercion will save people from unwanted mojibake (escaped string) and locale warning will navigate people to configure locale properly. And there are configure options and