Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 594: Removing dead batteries from the standard library

I've watched the entire thread and its taken me a few days to put a finger on what bothers me about it. In my opinion, this shouldn't be a pep describing the list of modules that need to go as "dead batteries", but should be a process pep describing how dead batteries should be removed, and the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEPs from non-core devs now need a sponsor

I'm confused about this. Didn't you need someone with merge permissions already to merge a pep into the pep repo? Isn't this just adding a layer of paperwork to something that was already the case for all practical purposes? > -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] Get a running instance of the doc for a PR.

Doesn't read the docs already do this for pull requests? Even if it doesn't, don't the core maintainers of read the docs go to pycon? I wouldn't suggest read the docs for primary docs hosting for python, but they are perfectly fine for live testing pull request documentation without having to

Re: [Python-Dev] Change in Python 3's "round" behavior

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Greg Ewing > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 9:50 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Change in Python 3's "round" behavior > > I don't really get the statistical argument. If

Re: [Python-Dev] Change in Python 3's "round" behavior

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Steven D'Aprano > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 9:54 AM > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Change in Python 3's "round" behavior > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 05:55:07PM +1200,

Re: [Python-Dev] Can I make marshal.dumps() slower but stabler?

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Victor Stinner > Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 4:01 AM > To: Serhiy Storchaka > Cc: python-dev > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Can I make marshal.dumps() slower but stabler? > > 2018-07-12 8:21 GMT+02:00

Re: [Python-Dev] why is not 64-bit installer the default download link for Windows?

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Paul Moore > Why not just have a second button, "Download Python 3.7.0 (64-bit)" > alongside or below the "Download Python 3.7.0" button? People who > don't know the difference will just ignore it,

Re: [Python-Dev] Microsoft to acquire GitHub for $7.5 b

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev > Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 10:01 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Microsoft to acquire GitHub for $7.5 b > > On 05.06.2018 17:28, Martin Gainty

Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?

> -Original Message- > From: Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 4:07 AM > To: Alex Walters <tritium-l...@sdamon.com> > Cc: Python Dev <python-dev@python.org> > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind sourc

Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?

This is precisely what I meant. Before asking this question, I didn’t fully understand why, for example, 3.5.4 got a binary installer for windows and mac, but 3.5.5 did not. This thread has cleared that up for me. From: Python-Dev On

Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?

Thank you, that's exactly what I needed to read. > -Original Message- > From: Ned Deily <n...@python.org> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:07 AM > To: Alex Walters <tritium-l...@sdamon.com> > Cc: Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> > Subject: Re: [Pyth

[Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?

In the spirit of learning why there is a fence across the road before I tear it down out of ignorance [1], I'd like to know the rationale behind source only releases of cpython. I have an opinion on their utility and perhaps an idea about changing them, but I'd like to know why they are done (as

Re: [Python-Dev] [RELEASE] Python 2.7.15

I've gotten some mixed signals on the status of this release, notably from the BDFL: https://twitter.com/gvanrossum/status/991170064417153025 "Python 2.7.15 released -- the last 2.7 release!" (and a link to this thread) I was under the impression that 2.7 was being supported until 2020. If this

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 572 contradicts PEP 3099

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev <python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Greg Ewing > Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 10:53 PM > To: 'Python-Dev' <python-dev@python.org> > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 572 contradicts PE

[Python-Dev] PEP 572 contradicts PEP 3099

PEP 3099 is the big list of things that will not happen in Python 3. Everything on that list is still true, 12 years after it was posted. However... "There will be no alternative binding operators such as :=." While earlier versions of PEP 572 avoided breaking this declaration, the current

Re: [Python-Dev] (Looking for) A Retrospective on the Move to Python 3

http://pyvideo.org/pycascades-2018/bdfl-python-3-retrospective.html link to Guido’s talk, for your convenience From: Python-Dev On Behalf Of Guido van Rossum Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 6:12 PM To: Brett Cannon Cc:

Re: [Python-Dev] Is it useful to update cgitb module?

Python-Dev] Is it useful to update cgitb module? On 4/7/2018 9:45 PM, Alex Walters wrote: Are there people still actively developing new cgi scripts in python? I know some modern HTTPDs don’t even support classic cgi without some kind of fastcgi daemon in between. I am aware that some

Re: [Python-Dev] Is it useful to update cgitb module?

Are there people still actively developing new cgi scripts in python? I know some modern HTTPDs don’t even support classic cgi without some kind of fastcgi daemon in between. I am aware that some parts of various wsgi tools use the cgi module, but is the cgitb module useful for them? Your

[Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is released. Is python 4 going to be another python 3?

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

Are you aware of pypy? > -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of asrp asrp > Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 7:02 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate PEP 370 Per user site-packages directory?

I would suggest throwing this to -ideas, rather than just keeping it in -dev as there is a much wider community of users and usecases in -ideas. ... and -ideas will shoot it down because user installs are too useful. It is also my understanding that it is the desire of PyPA to eventually have

Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing

From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium-list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of Chris Barker Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 12:46 PM To: Wes Turner Cc: Python-Dev Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing > No, it doesn't --

Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing

> -Original Message- > From: Alexander Belopolsky [mailto:alexander.belopol...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 4:33 PM > To: Alex Walters <tritium-l...@sdamon.com> > Cc: Elvis Pranskevichus <elpr...@gmail.com>; Python-Dev d...@python.or

Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of Elvis Pranskevichus > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:12 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Cc: Chris Barker > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601

Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing

> -Original Message- > From: Alexander Belopolsky [mailto:alexander.belopol...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2017 12:07 PM > To: Alex Walters <tritium-l...@sdamon.com> > Cc: Chris Barker <chris.bar...@noaa.gov>; Python-Dev d...@python.org> >

Re: [Python-Dev] iso8601 parsing

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of Alexander Belopolsky > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:54 PM > To: Chris Barker > Cc: Python-Dev > Subject: Re:

Re: [Python-Dev] Is Windows XP still supported on Python 2.7?

The promise that PEP-11 is making is that as long as a python was released while Microsoft still supported that OS, and that python is still supported, there will still be a python that works for you. So, yes, Windows XP is long since unsupported by Microsoft, but a disturbing number of people

Re: [Python-Dev] Python startup time

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of Paul Moore > Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2017 4:14 AM > To: David Mertz > Cc: Barry Warsaw ; Python-Dev d...@python.org> > Subject: Re:

Re: [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?

> -Original Message- > From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+tritium- > list=sdamon@python.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Krause > Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 1:01 PM > To: python-dev@python.org > Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever > waiting for