Hi.
Not really sure where to report this - missing closing parentheses in
the PEP text at the end of the second paragraph in section
'Implementation strategy'
http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0453/#id35
> and would not try to contact PyPI (instead installing directly
> from the pr
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 12:38:31 -0400, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:25 PM, "R. David Murray" wrote:
> > I don't think this PEP changes the inclusion calculus, because I don't
> > think we've given any real weight to that in stdlib inclusion decisions.
> > I think the decision making
On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:25 PM, "R. David Murray" wrote:
> This PEP looks great to me. Thanks to everyone involved.
>
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:46:01 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Reducing the burden of actually installing a third-party package should
>> also decrease the pressure to add every u
This PEP looks great to me. Thanks to everyone involved.
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:46:01 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Reducing the burden of actually installing a third-party package should
> also decrease the pressure to add every useful module to the standard
> library. This will allow additions
After a couple of rounds of review on distutils-sig, and with Martin
agreeing to serve as BDFL-Delegate, it's time for the pip
bootstrapping proposal to run the gauntlet of python-dev :)
The last round of review showed that there were a few things we were
assuming people knew (based on the many, m
