Florent XICLUNA, 01.03.2010 00:36:
> I exchanged some e-mails with Fredrik last week. Not sure if it will be
> 1.2.8 or 1.3, but now he is positive on the goals of the patch. I've
> commited all the changes and external fixes to a branch of the Mercurial
> repo owned by Fredrik. I'm expecting an an
2010/2/28 Stefan Behnel
> I would actually encourage Florent to do the opposite: act now and prepare
> a patch against the latest official ET 1.2 and cET releases (or their SVN
> version respectively) that integrates everything that is considered safe,
> i.e. everything that makes cET compatible
Martin v. Löwis, 20.02.2010 13:08:
>> Actually this should not be a fork of the upstream library.
>> The goal is to improve stability and predictability of the ElementTree
>> implementations in the stdlib, and to fix some bugs.
>> I thought that it is better to backport the fixes from upstream than
-On [20100220 22:47], "Martin v. Löwis" (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
>In general, that's the assumption, and Guido has stated that he dislikes
>exceptions. However, Fredrik's code was included only under the
>exception. ElementTree wouldn't be part of the standard library if an
>exception had not be
> Maybe I am fully misunderstanding something here and I am also known for
> just bluntly stating things but:
>
> Isn't inclusion into the standard library under the assumption that
> maintenance will be performed on the code?
In general, that's the assumption, and Guido has stated that he dislik
-On [20100220 13:04], "Martin v. Löwis" (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
>> The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
>> see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to ElementTree at
>> http://svn.effbot.python-hosting.com/ are dated 2006-07-05.
>
>And?
[snip]
># Sin
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:03 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> I'd rather drop ElementTree from the standard library than fork it.
Fork what? Upstream ElementTree is dead.
Schiavo
Simon
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.
Le Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:08:39 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
>
> Please be EXTREMELY careful. I urge you not to act on this until
> mid-March (which is the earliest time at which Fredrik has said he may
> have time to look into this).
Ok, so let's wait until then before we make a decision.
chee
> Actually this should not be a fork of the upstream library.
> The goal is to improve stability and predictability of the ElementTree
> implementations in the stdlib, and to fix some bugs.
> I thought that it is better to backport the fixes from upstream than to
> fix each bug separately in the st
> The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
> see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to ElementTree at
> http://svn.effbot.python-hosting.com/ are dated 2006-07-05.
And?
> To paraphrase Antoine's comment [1] on Rietveld -- we need a process
> that results i
Martin v. Löwis v.loewis.de> writes:
>
> > If the goals of Python ElementTree and Fredrik ElementTree diverge I don't
> > see a problem with an amicable fork.
>
> I see one: Fredrik will not consider such a fork amicable. Of course, if
> you could make him state in public that he is fine with a
Florent Xicluna, 20.02.2010 11:53:
> Stefan Behnel writes:
>> None of theses features is really required to hold for anything but the
>> current as-is implementation.
>
> I agree.
>
>> So my impression is that many of the tests try to provide guarantees where
>> they cannot or should not exist, a
Stefan Behnel behnel.de> writes:
>
> Florent Xicluna, 18.02.2010 10:21:
> > For this purpose, I grew the test suite from 300 lines to 1800 lines,
> > using both the tests from upstream and the tests proposed by Neil Muller
> > on issue #6232.
>
> Just a comment on this. While the new tests may
Florent Xicluna, 18.02.2010 10:21:
> For this purpose, I grew the test suite from 300 lines to 1800 lines, using
> both
> the tests from upstream and the tests proposed by Neil Muller on issue #6232.
Just a comment on this. While the new tests may work with ElementTree as
is, there are a couple o
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 9:57 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
>> repository.
>
> We have one: Fredrik Lundh.
The last commits by Fredrik to ElementTree in Python SVN that I can
see are dated 2006-08-16. The last commits I can see to
> We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
> repository.
We have one: Fredrik Lundh.
> Ideally this means pulling upgrades and bugfixes from
> Fredrik's repository every now and then. If the goals of Python
> ElementTree and Fredrik ElementTree diverge I don't see a probl
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 06:40:00 +0100, wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
> >>> It's time to comment and review.
> >> Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
> >> the code base without explicit approval by
All, I hope that Fredrik himself has time to chime in at least
briefly, but he told me off-line that he sees nothing controversial in
the currently proposed set of changes.
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
wrote:
> -On [20100219 08:37], Simon Cross (hodgestar+python.
-On [20100219 08:37], Simon Cross (hodgestar+python...@gmail.com) wrote:
>We need someone to maintain the copy of ElementTree in the Python
>repository. Ideally this means pulling upgrades and bugfixes from
>Fredrik's repository every now and then.
Which will give you nothing as that tree hasn't
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> Which most probably puts elementtree in bugfix-only mode. I don't
>> necessarily disagree with such a decision, but it must be quite clear.
The current situation is even worse than bugfix-only mode. Even
bugfixes struggle to make it in.
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
>>> It's time to comment and review.
>> Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
>> the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
>
> Which most probably puts elementtre
Le Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:46:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
>> It's time to comment and review.
>
> Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
> the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
Which most probably puts elementtree in bugfix-only mode. I don
> It's time to comment and review.
Unfortunately, it's not. I strongly object to any substantial change to
the code base without explicit approval by Fredrik Lundh.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org
Hello,
On November 2006 and September 2007 Fredrik proposed to update "xml.etree" in
Python 2.6 with the upcoming version 1.3.
Now we are three years later, and the version shipped with 2.7alpha3 is 1.2.6.
http://bugs.python.org/issue1602189#msg54944
http://bugs.python.org/issue1143
This would no
24 matches
Mail list logo
